Guild Wars 2

Thats it! I’m done. The necromancer is dead to me. Arena Net honestly can’t be trusted to keep true to the lore of there own game. Necromancers now have the element of destruction, life and purity. There isn’t going to be a Cantha expansion, there isn’t going to be a ritualist, they are never going to answer the questions left behind in GW1. The spider god is going to be written out of the story, the asura did come to the surface before Eye of the north, Magic is crumbling, what ever it meant to be a necromancer is now meaning less.

Thanks Arena Net. You broke my trust in you… I trusted that you would keep true to the flavor and lore of the game, but you can’t even do that.

They will break everything the next patch not only the necro.

They will kitten it up hard.

I’d take in favor of fixing a class and adding more diversity then sticking to 100% of the lore, just sayin.

vizups.3824:

They will break everything the next patch not only the necro.

They will kitten it up hard.

It isn’t even the necromancer anymore. They might as well change the name to warlock. Because it sure as hell has nothing in common with the necromancer. I would play GW1, but arena net seems to have abandoned any new updates for that in favor of temporary content and stomping all over the flavor and lore of their franchise.

Brighteluden.2974:

I’d take in favor of fixing a class and adding more diversity then sticking to 100% of the lore, just sayin.

It doesn’t do thakittens just a very lazy way to fix a problem that would be fixed if they put a bit more thought and effort into it. Honestly, I seen no reason now why they are holding back in invulnerability and stability for the necormancer now.

OH hey! Why don’t we just give the Guardian bleeding, poison and torment? Why should the necromancer be the only one who is giving things that breaks lore? The Guardian doesn’t have a good condition spec. They need it. While we are at it, the thief should have shouts. And the Engineer should use signets.

Will you at least wait until a few days after the patch hits, to see the exact details of the necromancer’s cremation abilities?

Edit: Okay so work with me here but
A thief shout
with 200 range
that can only be used from stealth
that causes fear
called “BOO!”

With a similar shout called “Surprise!” that causes confusion.

Softspoken.2410:

Will you at least wait until a few days after the patch hits, to see the exact details of the necromancer’s cremation abilities?

Edit: Okay so work with me here but
A thief shout
with 200 range
that can only be used from stealth
that causes fear
called “BOO!”

With a similar shout called “Surprise!” that causes confusion.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/upcoming-skill-and-trait-changes/

And the warrior should use staves and drink blood. The elementalist should get into bar fist combat. why not? It would add more options and fix a problem they might have had.

Lily, I’ve already read the blog post. It’s kind of short on exact details. I mean, technically Necromancers ‘have access to’ confusion and vigor already. I get that you’re pretty mad, I’m just saying you shouldn’t do anything drastic before they throw back the curtain completely.

Edit:
vvv Whoop, forgot about that. vvv That one does rely on your enemy putting up aegis though, while we can do confusion / vigor ourselves.

Softspoken.2410:

Lily, I’ve already read the blog post. It’s kind of short on exact details. I mean, technically Necromancers ‘have access to’ confusion and vigor already. I get that you’re pretty mad, I’m just saying you shouldn’t do anything drastic before they throw back the curtain completely.

And burning, on corrupt boon, when it works…

Honestly, As much as I just want the class to better off, I am really curious how burning is supposed to be stuffed into Necromancer Lore also. I mean, We are followers of Grenth, right? There has to be some kind of explanation of it otherwise it just seems strange to have such a skill pop up.

Sepreh.5924:

Softspoken.2410:

Lily, I’ve already read the blog post. It’s kind of short on exact details. I mean, technically Necromancers ‘have access to’ confusion and vigor already. I get that you’re pretty mad, I’m just saying you shouldn’t do anything drastic before they throw back the curtain completely.

And burning, on corrupt boon, when it works…

The philosophy behind that is the necromancer is revealing a dark truth about something, converting it into something that was always a part of it and not actually just throwing fire.

Ah good to know. To be honest, I know little to nothing about GW lore but think that it is extremely interesting and would add an awesome aspect to the game if it was more promenant

From my point of view there’d be nothing wrong with a Guardian using Bleed.
They are hitting things with sharp bits of metal, I don’t think they have an oath to not make things Bleed.
Plus you can do it with a Sigil anyway, if you really want to.

I don’t see why a Thief couldn’t shout, unless he’s mute or gagged.
Rangers have shouts, too, it’s not some “GRR big bad warrior-leader!” thing.
He’s just barking commands at his pet.
Thieves have Thieves Guild, so they are leaders of sort as well.
Some sort of “Ambush him!” shout could work.

Engineer not having Signets is odd.
Signets are just magic rings afaik. Sigils and Runes have magic too.
Eh, go figure. Warriors have plenty of them despite being about physical force.

As for GW2’s Necro I keep drawing some sort of connection between the Necromancer and the Underworld.
The color choices… and Death Shroud seeming to partially shift you into an another dimension where you hear all sorts of odd sounds.

GW1 Necros couldn’t use Death Shroud, which implies that GW2’s Necros differ in some way in their powers.

GW2’s Necro indeed may not be very far from a Warlock, communing with some sort of beings in the Underworld.

I find it very doubtful that every Necro follows Grenth.
Most Asura for example know of the Gods but don’t believe in them as something to worship.
Charr don’t exactly like the gods very much for obvious reasons.

Even human Necros have the option to pick any God in the character creation even if they are a Necromancer.

Thus if the new trait is linked to the underworld or some force yet unseen it could explain what’s going on.

I’ll agree with you if the skill is called “Cremation” or something else without an explanation, though.

Lily.1935:

The necromancer is dead to me.

I see what you did there!

LastDay.3524:

Engineer not having Signets is odd.
Signets are just magic rings afaik. Sigils and Runes have magic too.
Eh, go figure. Warriors have plenty of them despite being about physical force.

For the record, I’m pretty sure Engineers don’t have signet skills because they have the tool belt. In GW2 game play, a signet is a passive effect that you have to sacrifice for the active: tool belt skills would either have to work differently for that one category of skills, or they would basically be able to use some form of the active without ever using the passive.

I’m not super crazy about Necro having burning (I don’t think it’ll solve the class’s problems), but I don’t see a massive lore problem with it. Flames of hell, or whatever? Anyway, my first GW1 character was a N/E so since we’re not getting secondary classes back I think it’s a good compromise! ;p Oh, and one of my favourite GvG builds revolved around Rangers with Greater Conflagration, Eles with Mark of Rodgort, and necros with lots of minions – all the physical damage from the minions was turned to fire damage, which when it hit anyone hexed with Rogort’s turned to team-wide burning!

LastDay.3524:

From my point of view there’d be nothing wrong with a Guardian using Bleed.
They are hitting things with sharp bits of metal, I don’t think they have an oath to not make things Bleed.
Plus you can do it with a Sigil anyway, if you really want to.

I don’t see why a Thief couldn’t shout, unless he’s mute or gagged.
Rangers have shouts, too, it’s not some “GRR big bad warrior-leader!” thing.
He’s just barking commands at his pet.
Thieves have Thieves Guild, so they are leaders of sort as well.
Some sort of “Ambush him!” shout could work.

Engineer not having Signets is odd.
Signets are just magic rings afaik. Sigils and Runes have magic too.
Eh, go figure. Warriors have plenty of them despite being about physical force.

As for GW2’s Necro I keep drawing some sort of connection between the Necromancer and the Underworld.
The color choices… and Death Shroud seeming to partially shift you into an another dimension where you hear all sorts of odd sounds.

GW1 Necros couldn’t use Death Shroud, which implies that GW2’s Necros differ in some way in their powers.

GW2’s Necro indeed may not be very far from a Warlock, communing with some sort of beings in the Underworld.

I find it very doubtful that every Necro follows Grenth.
Most Asura for example know of the Gods but don’t believe in them as something to worship.
Charr don’t exactly like the gods very much for obvious reasons.

Even human Necros have the option to pick any God in the character creation even if they are a Necromancer.

Thus if the new trait is linked to the underworld or some force yet unseen it could explain what’s going on.

I’ll agree with you if the skill is called “Cremation” or something else without an explanation, though.

All magic in the world of tyria is effected by the blood stone. It puts certin limitations on magic that can’t be bypassed with out seriously weakening the usability of the second type of magic the user wishes to use. In the case of the necromancer, using burning is a power granted to the school of destruction and preservation. The necromancer belongs to neither of those and wouldn’t favor seriously weakening their death magic.

Arena Net take a rather traditional look at the elements. And every profession in GW1 that could use more then one of the 4 schools of magic was extremely weak in the use of it. For example, the dervish could use multiple schools of magic, however they where far weaker with magic then that of an elementalist. They made up for it by using cheep and simple spells in order to augment there abilities.

As for the elements. The concept of fire, even in GW1, is a element of destruction, war as well as life and purity. A necromancer would have an extremely hard time using such an ability considering that they are about corruption and death. While water on the other hand is a element of mystery, darkness, death and cold. The necromancer favors ice and water over fire. Fire can’t spread disease, can’t cause infection, it actually stops bleeding. Water on the other hand, can spread disease and carry infectious bacteria. Winter, the season of water, is even the season of death.

In conclusion, it doesn’t actually mater any if the other races worship Grenth or not, they still have to abide by the same limitations the blood stone has put in place. Only the Ritualist knew how to surpass the blood stones and they did it with a level of understanding of the mists the the necromancer honestly doesn’t have.

manveruppd.7601:

I’m not super crazy about Necro having burning (I don’t think it’ll solve the class’s problems), but I don’t see a massive lore problem with it. Flames of hell, or whatever? Anyway, my first GW1 character was a N/E so since we’re not getting secondary classes back I think it’s a good compromise! ;p Oh, and one of my favourite GvG builds revolved around Rangers with Greater Conflagration, Eles with Mark of Rodgort, and necros with lots of minions – all the physical damage from the minions was turned to fire damage, which when it hit anyone hexed with Rogort’s turned to team-wide burning!

Flames of hell is only a modern idea of death. Fire in mythology is the element of life, destruction and purity. This was also translated rather well into the first game, but Arena net have seem to forgot that. Water on the other hand is the element of death. Fire is the polar opposite of what the necromancer stands for.

Engineers won’t get signets because of their toolbelt. Effectively, each signet would have two actives, one of which would not remove the passive effect. This is at odds with how signets are supposed to work, so their restriction from signets is actually a mechanical limitation,

As for necros being followers of Grenth, that’s true for Humans, but what about Asura, Charr, Norn, and Sylvari? Charr in particular would have good reason for flames in necromancy, and cremation fits right in with the death rites and such that necromancers are usually called upon to perform in Tyria.

I refuse to believe that the Burning condition is inherently at odds with necromancer lore. It all depends with how it is presented. I’m betting they will go with the cremation angle (or other funerary rites).

I might not agree with excluding burning because I believe it helps gameplay, and for me gameplay > lore (although I can totally see why people would disagree), I love reading these threads because the lore for this game is interesting (shame they did such a terrible job presenting it).

Bhawb.7408:

I might not agree with excluding burning because I believe it helps gameplay, and for me gameplay > lore (although I can totally see why people would disagree), I love reading these threads because the lore for this game is interesting (shame they did such a terrible job presenting it).

Agreed man. Lily, is there a decent way to catch up on the lore or did you just learn it all from GW1?

Sepreh.5924:

Agreed man. Lily, is there a decent way to catch up on the lore or did you just learn it all from GW1?

I bring up the GW1 wiki and go surfing. Pick an article, open the links that are in there that you don’t already know, and let the wiki take you on a journey. Not quite as well presented as this might be, but the lore is generally there.

We had sec classes in GW1. Nobody cared that we could use monk skills on our necros back than… why make such a fuss about getting burning

It is woefully uncreative, isn’t it? A trademark of this class.

Could make it green & call it ‘Burning Itch’ ?

Bhawb.7408:

I might not agree with excluding burning because I believe it helps gameplay, and for me gameplay > lore (although I can totally see why people would disagree), I love reading these threads because the lore for this game is interesting (shame they did such a terrible job presenting it).

Giving them burning doesn’t help gameplay. It helps A single build that just so happens to be popular. It doesn’t improve the game play unless you are a spike player, and if you are, you don’t play a necromancer because they aren’t top tier. Which means you only care about winning.

It is a lazy way to try and fix a problem that could be fixed with out the lore breaking addition of burning. Imagine of magic the gathering suddenly decided that the color red wasn’t strong enough so they gave them enchantment removal. That is so taboo to the flavor of red, that they would never consider it. They have done far more creative ways to help improve the competitive play of red with out resorting to break there own game’s rules.

I don’t know anything about Magic, nor do I care about it, so sorry but those examples fall flat on me; I have no idea what you are talking about.

Burning is only supposed to help condition damage builds. And no it doesn’t have to be burst. 1s of burning every 10 seconds isn’t bursty at all, it spreads out the pain over time (and is much less bursty than Terror is), just like 3 stacks of long duration bleeds would; except that burning will actually damage the target because it won’t be removed in 2 seconds and fall flat on its face accomplishing its task of damage. It gets in, does its 1 tick for a good bit of damage, and ends. There are plenty of ways they can introduce burning without it being bursty at all, and until they release numbers, we don’t know anything.

I can see a trait where chills apply burns. So cold it burns.

My chillomancer would love that. =D~~

Conditions are a game mechanic, and there is nothing lore-breaking about burning on a Necromancer no more or less than there is any issue with fear on a Warrior, confusion on a Warrior, stealth on a Mesmer, vulnerability on a Guardian, the lifeless undead being made to bleed, or what-have-you.

Bhawb.7408:

I don’t know anything about Magic, nor do I care about it, so sorry but those examples fall flat on me; I have no idea what you are talking about.

Burning is only supposed to help condition damage builds. And no it doesn’t have to be burst. 1s of burning every 10 seconds isn’t bursty at all, it spreads out the pain over time (and is much less bursty than Terror is), just like 3 stacks of long duration bleeds would; except that burning will actually damage the target because it won’t be removed in 2 seconds and fall flat on its face accomplishing its task of damage. It gets in, does its 1 tick for a good bit of damage, and ends. There are plenty of ways they can introduce burning without it being bursty at all, and until they release numbers, we don’t know anything.

Much of Guild Wars design philosophy mimics rather closely to Magic the gathering. There are thousands of parallels between the first game and MTG that it just looking at either once and you can see it. Even the skill type Flash enchantment from GW1 was inspired by the key word mechanic flash in magic the gathering.

Both games also had a philosophy that using balancing without breaking flavor was very important to the games. Arena Net back in GW1 wouldn’t dare give the necromancer burning or a monk poison just because a build might benefit from it. Arena Net wasn’t one to shy away from completely changing the function of skills, however they would have never broken flavor back in the day.

This new arena net is disappointing, and doesn’t hold true to what they created. And the lore and flavor are very much a part of gameplay. They are a core feature of gameplay. if they weren’t there wouldn’t be a single game that would care about story, professions or the world at all. Many games developers share your philosophy of gameplay over flavor and lore rather then a marriage between them. These games don’t last long. They die rather quickly.

You can’t just make a necromancer. You have to understand why people liked the necromancer. What made them so endearing that keep players with such a strong desire to continue playing them. Arena Net doesn’t seem to understand why players like the necromancer in the first place. If you asked them they would probably says “Dark fleshy minions and the whole death thing..” With no real understanding of what people actually liked.

The necromancer was one of the most popular profession in GW1. It wasn’t the easiest profession to use, or the most powerful. Yet so many loved playing them. now look at the necromancer in GW2. They are one of the least popular. Now compare that to the warlock in WoW. I have a good number of friends who played wow. Not a single one liked the warlock. it was basically a shrug, and what ever. So why would arena net emulate something that was so unpopular in comparison to something that was extremely popular and successful?

But then again, perhaps I’m mistaken on the popularity of the Warlock. Its clear though, that there was no way the percent of players who enjoyed the warlock could never have been nearly as high as the necromancer for GW1.

People already crying over rumors. AMAZING

Here’s a suggestion: don’t take the burning trait. Now take a deep breath and carry on.

My Mesmer sets people on fire all the time and I still manage not to lose it.

Knox.8462:

Here’s a suggestion: don’t take the burning trait. Now take a deep breath and carry on.

My Mesmer sets people on fire all the time and I still manage not to lose it.

Fire is a common theme of a telepath’s abilities to make there foe believe they are on fire. Although its rather hard to simulate making your foe believe they are burning. Fire when it pertains to a necromancer on the other hand who deal greatly with the undead is closer to there bane then something they would use.

Lily.1935:

Knox.8462:

Here’s a suggestion: don’t take the burning trait. Now take a deep breath and carry on.

My Mesmer sets people on fire all the time and I still manage not to lose it.

Fire is a common theme of a telepath’s abilities to make there foe believe they are on fire. Although its rather hard to simulate making your foe believe they are burning. Fire when it pertains to a necromancer on the other hand who deal greatly with the undead is closer to there bane then something they would use.

If I’m an all powerful master of undeath and general magic practitioner, I’d be kitten ed if I couldn’t figure out how to light someone on fire. It’s kind of mandatory for all sorcerers. Explain to me why Liches in almost all mythological forms can launch fireballs at people. Dragon Priests from Skyrim were technically Liches/Necromancers and their fireballs bloody hurt.

So get over it, if you don’t like the trait, don’t take it. (And again, the leak is probably false anyway)

I’m surprised you are mad about Necromancers being able to go all pyro on people instead of the fact that we can’t even perform Necromantics to resurrect corpses to do our bidding. We’re NOT Necromancers in this game. Don’t expect us to start acting like them now.

Burning is already basically guaranteed by the devs, the discussion isn’t about if we get burning, it is how.

TheMightyAltroll.3485:

Lily.1935:

Knox.8462:

Here’s a suggestion: don’t take the burning trait. Now take a deep breath and carry on.

My Mesmer sets people on fire all the time and I still manage not to lose it.

Fire is a common theme of a telepath’s abilities to make there foe believe they are on fire. Although its rather hard to simulate making your foe believe they are burning. Fire when it pertains to a necromancer on the other hand who deal greatly with the undead is closer to there bane then something they would use.

If I’m an all powerful master of undeath and general magic practitioner, I’d be kitten ed if I couldn’t figure out how to light someone on fire. It’s kind of mandatory for all sorcerers. Explain to me why Liches in almost all mythological forms can launch fireballs at people. Dragon Priests from Skyrim were technically Liches/Necromancers and their fireballs bloody hurt.

So get over it, if you don’t like the trait, don’t take it. (And again, the leak is probably false anyway)

I’m surprised you are mad about Necromancers being able to go all pyro on people instead of the fact that we can’t even perform Necromantics to resurrect corpses to do our bidding. We’re NOT Necromancers in this game. Don’t expect us to start acting like them now.

1. Liches have no mythology, they where a species created by fantasy writers. Although they did have bases in real mythology, the lich has none.

2. Just because you can use all magic types in one game doesn’t make it so that it applies to this game.

3. The blood stones act to limit the magical abilities so that no one being could have full control over all 4 of the magic schools. Both Liches from GW1 couldn’t use burning.

4. Who said I wasn’t upset about not being able to raise minions from corpses?

5. The Necromancer is a water aliened profession.

Lily.1935:

3. The blood stones act to limit the magical abilities so that no one being could have full control over all 4 of the magic schools. Both Liches from GW1 couldn’t use burning.

This seems like the main possible lore issue, but in my opinion, I don’t see throwing a couple seconds of burning here in there is a massive dip into a different school of magic.

I’m currently at work so I can’t hop onto the wiki due to a site blocker (why it blocks the wiki and not this… I don’t even). But the trait is called Dhuumfire, isn’t it? Didn’t Dhuum dwell in the Underworld when he was still kicking, and wasn’t the Underworld a bit fiery? It could be channeling flames from the Underworld, I suppose.

You could also look at the burning not as the victim being literally caught on fire, but the feeling of burning inside of them due to the corruption.

Just my two cents.

Sieg.8439:

Lily.1935:

3. The blood stones act to limit the magical abilities so that no one being could have full control over all 4 of the magic schools. Both Liches from GW1 couldn’t use burning.

This seems like the main possible lore issue, but in my opinion, I don’t see throwing a couple seconds of burning here in there is a massive dip into a different school of magic.

I’m currently at work so I can’t hop onto the wiki due to a site blocker (why it blocks the wiki and not this… I don’t even). But the trait is called Dhuumfire, isn’t it? Didn’t Dhuum dwell in the Underworld when he was still kicking, and wasn’t the Underworld a bit fiery? It could be channeling flames from the Underworld, I suppose.

You could also look at the burning not as the victim being literally caught on fire, but the feeling of burning inside of them due to the corruption.

Just my two cents.

To answer your question, Yes, Dhuum was the god of death. However he was a god before the time the bloodstones where created seeing as Grenth was already with the other 4 gods when Abaddon fell. So any magic that Dhuum used was far older and far more chaotic then the magic that humans have access to. However, I did make a story suggestion to deal with the blood stones to help explain this. Because the bloodstones are extremely important to the story and shouldn’t be ignored by arena net. Much like they are being now.

Then again, we don’t know what happened to the bloodstones. We do know that we can get shards of them, so it is possible they were broken (in which case, who knows what happened). It’s possible the awakening of the dragons altered things.

Or, it’s possible that necromancers just learned how to cremate with magic. For crying out loud, you’re saying on one hand that the divisions are absolute, then you mention the Dervish being able to access some magic of multiple bloodstones (and the elementalists being able to access them all). Well, why can’t the necromancer access a taste of the magic from another bloodstone? “burning from a trait” is a HUGE difference from “throwing fireballs as a regular attack”.

Knox.8462:

Here’s a suggestion: don’t take the burning trait. Now take a deep breath and carry on.

.

No doubt. Maybe Lily is just doing some serious roleplaying now ?

/shrug

Knox.8462:

Here’s a suggestion: don’t take the burning trait. Now take a deep breath and carry on.

My Mesmer sets people on fire all the time and I still manage not to lose it.

Once they’ve added burning, they’re going to balance around that burning. This gimps anyone who isn’t using burning. Hence, the dilemma.

I do hate the burning addition myself. Not only because it is unimaginative, but because its ineffective anywhere but tPVP.

Kasha Blackblood creates a ring of green fire in the Ascalonian Catabombs.

IT HAS DHUUM IN ITS NAME! = Awesome all arguments invalid, only thing more awesome would be if we could get Grenths Reapers (oh wait, looks and sobs at human elite).

Forzani.2584:

Knox.8462:

Here’s a suggestion: don’t take the burning trait. Now take a deep breath and carry on.
.

No doubt. Maybe Lily is just doing some serious roleplaying now ?
/shrug

Hey dont diss the roleplayers, they caused some laughs via map chat that pro comedians dream of, also its funny to mess with them when you butcher their mary sue with lore.

To be quite frank, you’re acting like your some kind of GW1 lore guru, but your interpretation of it annoys me a lot more than the fact that we get burning. (This is speaking as someone that followed GW1 lore pretty closely as well.)

But aside from that:
1) If the name is indeed something like Dhuumfire, I don’t see how this doesn’t fit in with the lore, seeing as some of Dhuum’s attacks were actually fire based : http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Judgment_of_Dhuum
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Impending_Dhuum

2) N/E, enough said.

Lily.1935:

Flames of hell is only a modern idea of death. Fire in mythology is the element of life, destruction and purity. This was also translated rather well into the first game, but Arena net have seem to forgot that. Water on the other hand is the element of death. Fire is the polar opposite of what the necromancer stands for.

Don’t take it that serious. It’s fantasy. In fantasy everything is possible. If in GW1 they told you that they have access to fire magic and ‘explained’ it lorewise, you wouldn’t have a problem.

ProtoGunner.4953:

Lily.1935:

Flames of hell is only a modern idea of death. Fire in mythology is the element of life, destruction and purity. This was also translated rather well into the first game, but Arena net have seem to forgot that. Water on the other hand is the element of death. Fire is the polar opposite of what the necromancer stands for.

Don’t take it that serious. It’s fantasy. In fantasy everything is possible. If in GW1 they told you that they have access to fire magic and ‘explained’ it lorewise, you wouldn’t have a problem.

Just to add its not fire and water its heat (the summer, fruit blossoms but the sun destroys the weak) and cold (winter, death of plants/animals go to sleep and the cold that can take even the strongest of burly men)

Arvid.3829:

1) If the name is indeed something like Dhuumfire, I don’t see how this doesn’t fit in with the lore, seeing as some of Dhuum’s attacks were actually fire based : http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Judgment_of_Dhuum
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Impending_Dhuum

Explained this twice already, one is fire only by damage type (for gameplay balance), it doesnt have the burning animation nor is it actually fire related, just as most devish attacks aint related to shadows but a lot still do it. Second is the green necro hit animation and not burning, check any video of getting Dhuumed.

Trash you got here couldn’t be further from an actual warlock concept. A practitioner of dark arts in general, that more often then not enters a pact with some otherworldly being to increase his/her power. An orthodox practitioner of magic that relies on more intuitive/inane capability rather then knowledge.
Wow’s warlocks were a far cry from what they tend to be described as in most folklore/literature. It was a sound concept from game play stand point though and still maintaining a spark of being on the more or less correct path.

Necromancer here on the other hand isn’t simply defying everything that word stands for. It spits on guild wars own lore. So meh… don’t confuse apples and oranges here. There is no spiritual aspect. No heavy pull towards the fact that necromancer is more of a priest then some generic spellcaster/dps/what ever the kitten else anet is trying to make it after they themselfs set it on that exact path to follow general consensus. Heck it carries no ritualistic aspect either… carries no direction of any kind. Forget lore it doesn’t even make sense from gameplay stand point. It’s like a collection of rejected ideas tossed together to fill the space. It’s insulting is what it is.

First thing you learn about necros here in this very game… is that they are priests of Grenth, god of death. Uhum… yeah… sure… thats why we have green mosquitos accelerating us. And we draw graffiti everywhere. Oh yeah and we put cow entrails and baby heads into rats carcases and call em miiiiniiiions.
/facepalm

HiSaZuL.2843:

Trash you got here couldn’t be further from an actual warlock concept. A practitioner of dark arts in general, that more often then not enters a pact with some otherworldly being to increase his/her power. An orthodox practitioner of magic that relies on more intuitive/inane capability rather then knowledge.
Wow’s warlocks were a far cry from what they tend to be described as in most folklore/literature. It was a sound concept from game play stand point though and still maintaining a spark of being on the more or less correct path.

Necromancer here on the other hand isn’t simply defying everything that word stands for. It spits on guild wars own lore. So meh… don’t confuse apples and oranges here. There is no spiritual aspect. No heavy pull towards the fact that necromancer is more of a priest then some generic spellcaster/dps/what ever the kitten else anet is trying to make it after they themselfs set it on that exact path to follow general consensus. Heck it carries no ritualistic aspect either… carries no direction of any kind. Forget lore it doesn’t even make sense from gameplay stand point. It’s like a collection of rejected ideas tossed together to fill the space. It’s insulting is what it is.

First thing you learn about necros here in this very game… is that they are priests of Grenth, god of death. Uhum… yeah… sure… thats why we have green mosquitos accelerating us. And we draw graffiti everywhere. Oh yeah and we put cow entrails and baby heads into rats carcases and call em miiiiniiiions.
/facepalm

Warlocks =/= Necromancers, one use demons others use life and blood as a energy source (both shunned by arcane) – D&D stuff
For WoW, we should tech fall under Shadow priest/Frost DK/Afflic Locks (that was ususally the least warlocky of the 3 talent point lines/whatever they call it now)
Also we inherited the essence of the Dervishes, the transforms (both in elite and as profession mechanic), so being more on the side of Dhuum with his direct i slap you with a part of life itself and then with death itself seems to fit, i mean he is technically the God of Death (Grenth being Judgement). True that the rats and giant chicken are ugly (sadly in a not cute horrible way, just plain ugly) but i like the undead windrider and floating black sperm. Wells are quite necrosih, as are marks and corruption skills while DS, spectral and our elites call more dervish, i mean its just like Guardians are part paragon part monk.

Andele.1306:

Arvid.3829:

1) If the name is indeed something like Dhuumfire, I don’t see how this doesn’t fit in with the lore, seeing as some of Dhuum’s attacks were actually fire based : http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Judgment_of_Dhuum
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Impending_Dhuum

Explained this twice already, one is fire only by damage type (for gameplay balance), it doesnt have the burning animation nor is it actually fire related, just as most devish attacks aint related to shadows but a lot still do it. Second is the green necro hit animation and not burning, check any video of getting Dhuumed.

I’m pretty sure the guy is burning…

HiSaZuL.2843:

First thing you learn about necros here in this very game… is that they are priests of Grenth, god of death.

And where would that be exactly? Hell, I’m human (about the only race that truly considers the Six to be gods) and never in my story have I been considered a priest. Trahearne isn’t a priest, Killeen isn’t a priest, Majory isn’t a priest, etc.

- in 720, no fire (you do get burning from the hydras – your vid, and from a ele, the pvp vid in recommended section, no ban i saw in game was set aflame by dhuum (but mobs around them did blind, poison, bleed, Dwound, etc).

Also Rhie is one, as was the lich you kill in the sylvari story (kinda under the illusion of being one while actually helping zhaitan, but still counts).
On that note how can sylvari or any of the races work with necromancy to begin with? Or even being mesmers, the 2 professions are directly tied to the gods that shaped them. True Asura and Mursaat Golemancy was simmilar (it uses ore/blood) but it needed to be already to be magically enchanted, so trying to make sense out of contradictions in game wont help much since most of everything NPC said could be a lie/missinfo just like the jotun and seer talk.