Quote:
Originally Posted by Uteunayr
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I really want to believe you're trolling at this point. This perception is why Necromancers had to fight an uphill battle to group, and even more so now in P1999, because people who blindly believe Necromancer is a DPS class will be slinging DoTs onto mobs that die before 3 ticks get off, and they'll claim that's their job, no matter how inefficient and shitty it is. If you want to make arguments about the efficacy of a class based on DPS, find another class.
|
I went and checked the Necromancer spell list. From 56-60, Necromancers receive
10 damage spells (including two pets) and
3 utility spells (including Death Peace from Velious).
I'm certainly not going to accuse you of trolling but I'm really surprised you can't see his point: Necromancers were designed as a DPS class, but Verant decided they were too strong in classic (remember the uproar over necromancer pets with their double FS daggers? or necros soloing the Ghoul Lord while FD?) and so in Kunark they gave Necromancers a few situationally useful utility spells instead of better pets or big upgrades to nukes. They did exactly the same thing to magicians, who got CoH and mod rods rather than a 6000HP Earth Pet.
Edit: Also the necro heal line being dispellable is almost certainly unintentional, and possibly not classic. If you don't dispell your recourse, then you heal at about 1 mana / 2 HP, i.e. worse than a Druid (and no regeneration). Also twitch means a necro can give 20 mana/tick to ONE player. An enchanter can give 14 mana / tick to the entire raid. I just don't see how you can build a class around an inefficient heal, an inefficient means of mana regeneration, and rezzing the cleric after wipes.