I don't think they'll add the Necro, cause like someone else stated in another thread this isn't Diablo 2.5, it's Diablo 3 and it needs some innovation - new stuff. Yeah people liked the Necro in general and yeah he was very powerful in the right hands, but I think the WD is the new Necro if you wanna compare them that way to each other. Get used to it.
I think they kept the Barb because he is kinda the symbol of Diablo I think, but the Wizard, Monk, Demon Hunter and WD are totally new characters - good work Blizzard. I guess one could argue that the Wizard is comparable to the Sorceress, but in a new version and with more versatility it seems, hence the new name for the type of class.
Well the rationale for bringing back the Barbarian, as Blizzard explained it when the game was announced, was that they felt like it could be greatly improved upon, and they started with a different type (probably multiple iterations) of heavy melee characters but they just kept thinking of it as the Barbarian.
And even though it is the same name and general look (although different armors will make the Barb in D3 look different), the Barbarian in D3 seems to have a wide range of skills that make it considerably different than the Barbarian in D2.
I have been considring this thread for a while now, and was thinking, might the witch doctor feel more like the druid than the Necro in playstyle?
The Necro had long range spells for offensive spells with really only 2 mid/short range skills (poison nova and poison dagger) the witch doctor and druid seem to have more mid range spells (Druid because most have random pathing and with a few exceptions the Docs spells are burst around him or sprays in front (plague of toads, Firebats, Locus swarm) Both the Doc and Druid have some long range spells and they are area target (like fissure/volcano or Haunt/Acid Cloud)
In terms of summons the Necro had like 30 summons while the druid had at most 12 counting crows at any one time. How many zombie dogs can you have? like 5~8 plus the gargantuan(maybe) and a giant toad(does that even count?) True the Necro could go Golem which had more of the few tough summons feel that the doc and Druid have, I will grant that.
Then comes the support area. Necro had a whole tree of support spells Which worked for the summons (not all of them but we could say a good 5~7 skills. The Duid had 0~2 if you count the spirit as one and then either Hurricane or Shockwave) here the Doc falls nicely between the two with 2~4 with confuse, horrify, hex, and zombie wall.
Finally there are the lose ends.
- Druids could shape-shift and be a melee character. Yes, But This type of Druid felt very different from the caster druid and really restricted builds to choose either Shifting or elemental more than nearly any other class. The casting druid, however, is where the Doc and Druid is were I saw the alignment.
-We don't know all of the skills or how runes affect them exactly for the Doc, so he might feel like the Necro with some rune selections (I'm looking at you Fetish Army)
Just what I've been considering and wanted to breath some more life into the thread because ScyberDragon is so Awesome. :thumbsup:
Edit: Clarification-Am I saying Doc=Druid? No, I am however saying I feel it is a closer analog than Doc to Necro
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If that made sense to you, Bravo! I think I even confused myself...
A completed summoner would be what alot of people are looking for, and that's one of the things possible to look forward to when alot of "voices" has been reminding a possible reinvention of the class.
What do we remember about Necro = bone related weaponry/shielding/blockades skill. Curses. The look. As a summoner himself.
Oh, sorry. I was too hasty to reply. But if there had been a question mark after the "What is wrong...", followed by "A necro?", my one-word reply would have been more meaningful (but still equally vague)...
I dont have any problem with the WD, even though i love the necromancer. Unlike the necromancer, the WD is more customizable when it comes to skills etc, if you know what i mean? We havent seen that character before and they can change whatever they want. With the necromancer, its not as easy.
The Witch Doctor can do everything the Necromancer could do, and more. Unlike the Necromancer, the Witch Doctor has access to more direct-damage spells, most of which are elemental in nature (fireball, poison, disease, etc.).
I would rather have the Witch Doctor than a Necromancer. The Witch Doctor is new and exciting for me, while the Necromancer is an over-done class in RPG's and would bring nothing new to the table. I don't understand why they didn't do this with ALL of the classes. Instead of a Barbarian, have a Dervish or Dragoon; instead of a Demon Hunter (which we all know is just an archer with traps), have a Sniper who relies only on long ranged attacks. The point is they need to stop relying on well-known and overused archetypes for classes.
Despite typically choosing traditional mages in most of the games I play, I know for a fact that I'll be playing the Monk and the Witch Doctor far more than the other three, assuming I even bother with the Sorcerer or Barbarian.