Is FFXIV hinting Berserker, Necromancer, and Chemist next expansion?

[reivaxe]

What Lersayil said really is the crux of the problem for Necormancer in 14 for me, yes you could do it and yes you could make it work, but 14 has established what a Necromancer in lore is, and if you deviate from that you'll just end up with a Gunbreaker situation, do they use Gunblades? Yes, is it what any of the people who have asked us to use Garlean gunblades since 2.0 likely expected? No, Gunbreaker gave us playable Gunblades at the cost of being nothing like any Gunblade whielder we'd seen in 14 before their addition.

I love how Gnb turned out so I'm all for it.
Besides, I think people were more pissed that Gnb wasn't a DPS than it not being a Garlean gunblade.

Yes, it's a "compilation" and yes I am summing it up as something of a caricature because the compiled point seems illogical to me.

My point is unrelated to whether an "altered necromancer without zombies" would be a viable class.

My actual point is that in setting out to argue that the zombie-summoning necromancer boss could be a hint at a playable necromancer class, then being told that it couldn't work as-is, people are coming up with workarounds that involve removing everything about the idea that resembles what the boss is and does, while maintaining that the boss must be a hint that this altered class is coming.

By keeping fixed on the two ideas "necromancer could work somehow" and "there is a necromancer boss in the game that must be a hint at the class" and trying to equate the two ideas as they shift further apart, that starts looking illogical.

Or to look at it another way, let's say the game designers did set out to implement necromancer and had to make these alterations - giving it a different name and inventing a skill set that doesn't involve any zombies or "dark powers", ending up with something quite different. Let's call it Spiritmancer.

If the developers then wanted to hint at the existence of Spiritmancer, we would be fighting a Spectral Spiritmancer in the Heroes' Gauntlet who gives a glimpse of that job's skill set, rather than a necromancer who summons zombies.

I think people point to her as a hint because she's highlighted as unique in the dungeon. Of the bosses she's the only one who still seems to hold onto her sense of awareness for the most part as she's also having a mental break down. She tries to reach out to us and talk to us as she's also trying to kill us. She's there so we know she's a WoL/ Hero in her world. Trust comment about how there's still light under all that darkness inside her and she gets the thick wife Minion.

There's also the whole Thief -> Rouge and Berserker -> Warrior connections making the thought that Necromancer -> "Something else" hint make sense.

As for me, IDC about the name "Necromancer". I agree that they wouldn't use that name in this game or human zombies (GW2 actually has a Necromancer class and even they don't summon human zombies. PART of what they can do is summon creepy minions, monsters and shades as well as buff friendlies, debuff and CC enemies. Still feels very much like a Necro to me even if it's not humans), but the concept of a DoT mage that deals in matters of the soul/ aether who life drains and debuffs with a dark aesthetic lines up with a lot of things I predict to come based on other factors. The Dungeon Necro could just be someone who went too far and the way necromancers are seen on the source could play into the story of w/e the necro like mage would have to deal with.

Personally I find the lore dump of different types of Aether in this expac as well as Alisaie's arc regarding this topic to be criminal understated and underrated. The "Necromancer -> something else" is just a cherry ontop to me.

[znushu]

As for me, IDC about the name "Necromancer". I agree that they wouldn't use that name in this game

They already kinda did though during the Physical DPS Role Quest, so if anything it's already established that a 'necromancer' job exists in The First.

[GucciSan]

...I think people point to her as a hint because she's highlighted as unique in the dungeon. Of the bosses she's the only one who still seems to hold onto her sense of awareness for the most part as she's also having a mental break down...

...There's also the whole Thief -> Rouge and Berserker -> Warrior connections making the thought that Necromancer -> "Something else" hint make sense.

She's not so unique compared to the other two. We've been dealing with the concept of reflections all of Shadowbringers and the three bosses are more reflections but of Jobs we're already familiar with:

Thief is Rogue but with NIN skills

Berserker is Warrior but with a DRK greatsword

Necromancer is pretty much SMN but obviously uses the dead. I don't think it's been established whether Primals exist anywhere but the Source, so they got someone that does summoning in a manner of speaking. The dungeon itself didn't give her any spotlight either; there was no cutscene to introduce her or 'demonstrate' any skills a Necro would use, or any sort of dialogue before or after in the story meant to highlight her specifically. I'd argue Edda should be considered the biggest 'hint' because we've had a whole questline with her spanning multiple expansions.

Her dialogue in the way she speaks to us is also similar in the way Edda tried to speak with us; it's to highlight the fact that she's gone insane in the pursuit of the power that she wanted, but she actually recognizes it but knows it's too late for her to do anything about it.

[Seraphor]

Technicality, but I think as Edda was a WHM, and the PotD was Gelmorran, that Necromancer should technically be a corruption of white magic, rather than an alternate version of SMN.
The SB WHM quest line touched on raising the dead as a corruption of conjury. It even uses a staff/cane like weapon.

So I'd say WHM is to Necromancer as NIN is to Thief and WAR is to Berserker.

[Aluja89]

Technicality, but I think as Edda was a WHM, and the PotD was Gelmorran, that Necromancer should technically be a corruption of white magic, rather than an alternate version of SMN.
The SB WHM quest line touched on raising the dead as a corruption of conjury. It even uses a staff/cane like weapon.

So I'd say WHM is to Necromancer as NIN is to Thief and WAR is to Berserker.

Good catch!

I suppose healers could also use a edgy job.

[ADVSS]

My wild card surprise guess might be that instead of limited job they decided to make blue mage a normal (and limited) job due to player salt mines, I'd put that on the pretty wild side though. Anything beyond that and I'm going into the "I think that's very unlikely or out of no where" section, like I'd love to see a transformation based job but unless you count FFXVI or the first mini-main antagonist of ShB there is zero hints of that concept anywhere (which isn't a requirement in order to be made of course lo). Anyway that's my weak guess... Might be able to determine more after a trailer or something.



An aside I like to add occasionally is that I'm not even trying to get necromancer added, I just find people being 100% confident in a way they've been wrong in serious ways before in order to shutdown or even for some as a way to make fun of the the desires of others (didn't see that here, but have seen it else where).. well I just find that disgruntling. Necromancer is one of the more likely to be no due to lore, and moral (/china) issues if you summon humans, but yet still if someone wants to raise that flag of desire- so while at best it might be "very very unlikely" you can also work on paths and concepts to make it more 'plausive' if still unlikely (like removing the human zombie, adding willing souls, using monsters as part of the equation, etc). If the entire game population wanted Necromancer then you can bet your bottom dollar we'd be getting it (of course the entire game population isn't dying for that job, so I'd not bet a bottom dollar lol).

My greatest assumption would be that we get another healer, i think we all know thats definitely make or break. Hell they might keep denying it but i feel like its probably time to give healers their own mounts like tanks have. We all know it might be suicide if another healer doesnt make it in 6.0 day one. As for what they will add next, and also what is needed? What would be workable with this system and what would make sense? Well i suppose thats what we can absolutely speculate. Making BLU permanent would be a smart move, to fill that 4th caster role, whether by 6.0 or 7.0 in my optinion(also it would make an amount of BLU diehards extremely happy if done reasonable) when i see the 4 tanks, 4 melee, 3 rangedphys, 4 magic -1 limited, and 3 healers it just makes me think the goal would be an even 4/4/4/4 but i guess it really doesnt have to play that way at all
Another thing I like to do for speculation is go look at their track record and see what tends to be common with most new jobs, the big factor is popularity and request. Probably besides machinist in a small degree, every single job added since 2.0 has been heavilly suggested like in the top 5's or so. Im going with BST/Tamer whether limited or not is probably something thats probably as highly requested as Dancer was. You guys can speculate whatever

[Ruinfeild]

Interesting as I think it is necromancer and chemist might be a good bet.

At least on my end it would be interesting to see a T3 tier of jobs after the ones that we have (or at least for some of them). Granted, people have pointed out that berserker carries the same weapon as a DRK and not sure how it would work for CHM and NCR (Chemist and Necromancer), but I am sure the berserker can be changed to duel wield two one handed swords.

[Shougun]

You say that, but the term necromancer is suprisingly unknown to anyone that isn't at least midly versed in the fantasy genre, so even if we say popular pop culture, its still rather niche.

Anyways, sure the necromancer theme can be wide and could encompass a number of power domains, but the "popular" definition is very strict: reanimation of corpses and life drain / negative energy effects. Both of these effects are present and explained phenomenon in the lore and considered taboo (both the end effect and the method). The workarounds so far proposed either hurt the lore, or twist the necromancer theme to something you wouldn't call a necromancer at first glance.

It isn't really an issue of creativity, but the relatively cemented image of the necromancer and conflict with already existing lore.

I would say, and have also agreed, there is a 'stereotype' but in this situation there has been a huge breadth too and so if someone asks for necromancer if you just shut them up before you hear what they want and especially before you hear if they are willing to adjust to make it happen then you wouldn't know / prematurely close down conversations because of a lack of care (which I feel is a shame). Lore no is not the only way people do this but in a general sense when I see someone close something down without a care I frown, like "you didn't even try, you just curled your lips and said no - I hate reading that you did that" *queue that bugs bunny no meme image.

They could truly just want the dark soul magic nature, or maybe they played a curse build or something in some other game. And even if we take out human zombies which I've tried to be clear is one of the biggest lore hurdles I've seen in this game lol and where I believe a lore no would make the most sense here (but out of principle I still go "if it's 0.5% possible it's still possible"), you can still have it 'clearly and stereotypically' be necromancer without using dead human bodies.

Like lets say it was soul and blood magic, you took the willing souls of beings (humans and not, like you might even include dragon souls if you really wanted - Nidhog would indeed fuel some rage), angry and not, and the blood of monsters and created these undead monster wraiths. To normal people the wraiths were invisible, like classic ghosts, leaving a cold feeling, but to those with echo / magical power they could see them. Ghosts with hints of flesh and blood. Angry souls can even come with the idea that you're providing some way to vent out said energy for the greater good. Many games just give the necromancer just these wraith demon like things, a partially living undead wraith could look very cool, very wicked, and still not require that you just 'desecrated' someone to accomplish that (depending on design you could also only have to make one version instead of 2, to follow any China censorships).

Of course you could make it more light theme'd like if you got support from your Scions. In which case if you say had a being infused with the willing support of Louisoix then non-keen magic NPC might just feel an otherworldy warmth.

Doing mixed concepts like above can also move around some of the issues of hurting nature, 1/3 beast 1/3 willing soul 1/3 self powered creation magic. This is just one of many examples one could conjure up to begin to think around the problem that is necromancer, while still keeping it strongly necromancer (and you could deviate further of course and so it's more like a historical / non-popculture necromancer if someone wanted that).

It would still be taboo but honestly that is a desired effect by many, they want it to be questionable but they're, at least most I read, are not asking 'evvvillllllll'. And you can absolutely come up with a non-evil use for necromantic powers. Like personally I'd love a job that's costly like Harmonixer from Shadow Hearts- at least for most of the job's life (like Harmonixer lol), and of course if you simply make the lore "do you want to learn this dangerous act?" that it sounds a little funny as a WoL and that's why you have to be creative (like designing blue mage FFXI situations, you can easily add dark concepts without it being the WoL knocking on the devil's door and trying to sell their soul). Of course it would require a creative story, but that is part of the fun as it would be a different sort of presentation too- whether they go horror, comedy, or whatever it would need an unusual element and that makes it a bit special.

Of course that Harmonixer idea is to note that personally if we were going dark it'd not really have to do with any sort of pet / summon and more like applying dark energy onto oneself. But hey a void mage would be cool too. I've a bias but just in general would love to see SE go out of their way to make a story beyond the standard fellowship of the ring where each person stands up and says "my sword, my axe, my bow"- would like someone like Frodo who's buckling under the pressure but goes on anyways (may point Dark Knight or even parts of like Warrior, but I was hoping even more into that, and I did enjoy at least Dark Knight- I didn't mind Warrior either but too many rocks man lol).

What Lersayil said really is the crux of the problem for Necormancer in 14 for me, yes you could do it and yes you could make it work, but 14 has established what a Necromancer in lore is, and if you deviate from that you'll just end up with a Gunbreaker situation, do they use Gunblades? Yes, is it what any of the people who have asked us to use Garlean gunblades since 2.0 likely expected? No, Gunbreaker gave us playable Gunblades at the cost of being nothing like any Gunblade whielder we'd seen in 14 before their addition.
That's the rub, you could add in a Necromancer that dose nothing that 14's lore says is off limits and by using outside game lore still get away with calling it a Necromancer, but in lore it would just have the name.
In fact if you did that most NPC's would likely wonder why someone who dose nothing that Necromancers do would willingly call themselves that and gain all the stigmas that follow.

That would indeed be a potential issue, it would also go up to if SE thinks they can make the vibe interesting. Like if it had some ancient or cool word leaning towards the concept of Reaper, it would free up some more imagery but still easily fit the description of necromancer.

Lots of people liked Gunbreaker, naturally some people didn't because they thought it was going to be something that it clearly wasn't lol. This would be a point of concern, doesn't make it forbidden as clear your example shows they've done it before, but it is an issue to mull over.

This is also why if people say "SE would never put you in a situation that could be harmful to people" and before I said "that's a bit sad for story telling potential" but now I can just point straight at ShB and be like "exhibit A. they can and did". To note one of the more, most?, liked story lines too. Particularly enjoyed that I wasn't just a goody two shoe in that situation, of course I wasn't evil but I actually felt awkward sometimes in the town thinking "what if I sneezed here and everyone died" occasionally I just left town instead of afking because of the fun story vibe (not crazy enough to say I can't enter town because of lore roleplay but that the thought even entered my head was awesome fun to me).

Yes, it's a "compilation" and yes I am summing it up as something of a caricature because the compiled point seems illogical to me.

My point is unrelated to whether an "altered necromancer without zombies" would be a viable class.

My actual point is that in setting out to argue that the zombie-summoning necromancer boss could be a hint at a playable necromancer class, then being told that it couldn't work as-is, people are coming up with workarounds that involve removing everything about the idea that resembles what the boss is and does, while maintaining that the boss must be a hint that this altered class is coming.

By keeping fixed on the two ideas "necromancer could work somehow" and "there is a necromancer boss in the game that must be a hint at the class" and trying to equate the two ideas as they shift further apart, that starts looking illogical.

Or to look at it another way, let's say the game designers did set out to implement necromancer and had to make these alterations - giving it a different name and inventing a skill set that doesn't involve any zombies or "dark powers", ending up with something quite different. Let's call it Spiritmancer.

If the developers then wanted to hint at the existence of Spiritmancer, we would be fighting a Spectral Spiritmancer in the Heroes' Gauntlet who gives a glimpse of that job's skill set, rather than a necromancer who summons zombies.

Thank you, of course I didn't love the caricature because I was like "that's a crappy example of my arguments" but sometimes caricatures prove their points in other methods- like showing frustration (and I've used them too! lol). So I'm actually glad you said that cause I was like "nah man I clearly didn't argue like that". I was waffling between 'they're frustrated' and 'they're being obtuse', was hoping for the first of course but wanted to be transparent that you had set me to think it might be the later.

As for the boss part it's personally never been a concern, as I mentioned before I'm here not really to say Necromancer needs to be a job but to be like "hey you necromancer fan, you can ignore those people who say it's impossible- please continue to dream, it may have to be altered but you're allowed to dream and you might find a viable path". It's true there are major lore hurdles that need to be addressed, just like with Summoner, but just like with summoner for some reason the people most skilled in the history of lore were also the least creative in generating potential futures- somehow in all the major lore no's I've seen those who focus and show mastery of the history are the ones that tend to flat out say no without any creative attempt while someone like me (who enjoys the lore but hasn't made it a thing I need to study) comes up with nearly exactly what SE ends up doing as a solution (which isn't to say I had influence, just that with only an 'acceptable' understanding I had came up with what SE felt was suitable). I wish to see lore used less as a bludgeon and see those who master the lore be more of a creative force than a police force- if I can make reasons why Summoner can break their limits, why beast races can exist, why a beast tribe doesn't need to be a beast to be a beast tribe, why certain jobs may evolve out of a theme to make room for others, then I would hope lore masters could do that with better style- yet that almost never happens. Of course this isn't a lore exclusive issue, people love saying no in general and I tend to address that as well as I love supporting the dreamers over those who want to lock things down but it is consistent enough I coined it the 'lore no' (sort of a hyper-conservative approach to lore that prevents things from changing unless SE does it themselves).

I would also argue on the boss point though that if the boss was a hint that it would merely be a hint and not a guide, since we also have a good guy who uses soul magic, and we've also had a few other soul tasks outside of that good guy (decent amount of soul related things this expansion). Just like Beserker is a Warrior, therefore she would obviously be some weird mirror of what actually would be made- so even if I used her as a reference for the existence of the job I'd not argue it would look like her precisely.

On your last point I'm sure many necromancer fans would be fine with that lol (I wouldn't say all of course. . XD). Just because someone wants necromancer does not mean they want specifically the most generic surface level shallow stereotype of the job, but if people just run in screaming impossibru before even letting them think through the desires and whatever the game has presented as a hurdle.. well then you're just shutting people down for something that might not actually be true (as you say we /might/ be able to get spiritmaster without much issue, necromancer comes with a lot more issues). Although I would add I think you could get extremely close to the stereotype without breaking things still. Like I said above if you had a soul and blood magic dark job you might say something like the job takes the blood of monsters from the field combine with the wills of willing souls to generate undead wraiths aspected to the nature of the humans their imbued with (WILLING humans lol, key word here). That if they imbue a undead-half wraith beast with rage it's because you're using a willingly rageful spirit, and that the lore could be you're releasing these energies giving a sense of catharsis to nature (guiding darker energies to a peaceful rest). For the good spirits just like a sort of bodhisattva you reach out for guidance. So you've avoided human body slavery (huge moral issue to the job), you've produced peaceful results with the job, and with the whole monster blood human soul you could also induce lore that avoids causing irreparable damage to nature. YET you still have ghoulish wraith like creatures at the necromancer's disposal- very much a stereotype vibe necromancer.

Hopefully it's clear I've no interest in bulldozing lore (although I certainly don't mind wading through it like a grass field, I see it bend, and it has swayed and bent before by SE's practice so it's not an illegal concept), as I showed to previous 'lore no's' (ones I've directly experienced being SMN, Beast Race, Beast Tribe, and specific job representations- ones that have later proven false even though lore originally went one direction- not the lore false but that the lore no was used as a bludgeon even though it was more like a squeaky toy screaming "you can't have that because I said so"). That I find being hyper-restrictive in the desires of others as a bit disappointing. That isn't to say you have to like what they want though, could still feel like necromancer is a terrible job or that you want to level all the jobs but even if there is a 'good' to necromancer that you just don't want that job or whatever. But that's different than listing potential problems as impenetrable walls and then refusing to accept problem solving of any sort to said problems. Problems are there to solve- as an aside if you cant tell I don't listen to no very well or very often lol. "You can't have that". Me: "wanna bet?".

Bottom line being they 'could' do nearly anything, and they don't even have to break lore (which is something that while I don't study I still actively try to avoid, and have on occasion studied up just to combat the lore no and make examples that have actually then proven to be 'adequate' as either they influenced SE, possible but certainly not proven or required, or were close enough that I had generated a logical conclusion when someone tried to make one that might fit) - and it may be true that doing things in a certain exact way is incredibly unlikely (like producing the bad and scolded version of necromancer that is on the source, I'd bet against that EXACT representation, but with tweaks you could still very clearly have a necromancer, even a popculture one, and it not be like the ones that the source has had serious issues with- of course you'd still logically have some flak from NPCs but that is the magic some people want, they don't want to be the person who is always getting back pats and being lavished by tongue lashings, sometimes people want to have elements of the anti-hero, clearly Dark Knight's story leaned into that and a lot of people lauded that job's story as one of the best in the whole game for job stories). Maybe you change the name but if it walked, talked, and smelled like a choco--.. duc-- Necromancer, then it could very well be the necromancer someone was wanting to play.

Sometimes the name is not what they wanted, but the experience, vibe, and or gameplay style. I would like to see people be helpful with their knowledge rather than use it for the shackles and walls that it is not.

The problem is that you are conflating two things that aren't necessarily being said by the same people. Some people are saying the boss could be a hint towards the job, to which people are saying the job couldn't work. In reply to that, some people are saying the job could work, but might need some adjustments. These are not necessarily the same people who are saying the boss could be a hint.

For myself I see it precisely like this.

Technicality, but I think as Edda was a WHM, and the PotD was Gelmorran, that Necromancer should technically be a corruption of white magic, rather than an alternate version of SMN.
The SB WHM quest line touched on raising the dead as a corruption of conjury. It even uses a staff/cane like weapon.

So I'd say WHM is to Necromancer as NIN is to Thief and WAR is to Berserker.

Gameplay wise, from the stereotype, I can see the SMN some people mention but lore wise I'd say this makes sense (White Magic gone an entirely different direction than intended lol). Of course the visual of necromancer would be quite different, even if they put it under a healer like job (if we carried that white mage analogy into gameplay mechanics), and while there is a stereotype of gameplay they technically have a very large area to play with, especially if they take strong influence but give it some other name. Like Reaper would allow them to focus on souls, and still clearly could keep a 'dead' / dark sort of vibe and even fit the definition of a necromancer (pop-culture wise potential too, though it could be more creative / divergent).

[ADVSS]

Well as for a healer, there is that spell Reverse from FF12 as well as the whole "arcane" magic school, i think "Bubble" was in it as well(could be wrong its been ages since i played that game) but that would be an interesting element of healing that sorta does the same as shielding and mega healing, but in a different way, so alright ill dig if we're going to try a necro-type healer. Could focus on Umbral aspect of aether. So im guessing we would be eliminating the horde fights for me gimmick in place of something more accessible and managable. What would be their main schtick though? No job specific ability, or yes one?

Ill just list off the top of my head spells and abilities that could thematically fit that ive yet to see implemented that would at least put some iconism into this specific "dark" themed healer, some taken from time mage, or other jobs in the past

Age, Exit/Warp(probably enmity manipulating skill), Mute, Blink/Vanish(could work like TBN or the original rogues shade shift),Oil, Bubble, Reverse, XZone/Rub. Life3/AutoLife, Wall, Fast/Temper, Fear, Reflect if different from wall, Float(already in some raids), Toad/Mini/Pig(in the game as well) Teleport movement ability. Weak/Burn

Most of these could be debuffs/curses and buffs, Idk if The Dept of Healers would want a buffer/debuffer since it seems to be covered throughout dps and healers alike, but i guess it "Could" be a niche for a fourth healer.

Even Gunbreaker is pretty iconic, even if its more or less Squall/Seifer the Job.
I guess you could through a Gourmand "soul eating" Job like skill for flavoring, or whatelse really is left?Celes' Runic maybe?

[BlitzAceRush]

Snip.

While I do agree with you, I do feel there's a rather large difference between the light build up and a job, one we didn't even know was going to be harmful until we were a few wardens in, the other would be us willingly engaging in an activity.
Otherwise I agree but that's also the rub, I'm one of those people that really like Gunbreaker, but is it really a Gunblade job? Yes but also no, no one had any idea that would be what they'd get when they asked, something that has nothing in common with any Gunblade user previous in 14.

Another example of this would be Blue Mage, did it make it in? Yes but not in any form I think anyone was expecting, which is fine if all you cared about was it getting in.

Necro has tones of other things it could do and still be a Necro, but in the confines of 14 so far Necros all do the same thing which seems pretty off limits to the WoL/D, it's more at odds than Gunbreaker because at least that has the weapon, the iconic bit, in 14 Necros are defined by what they do, not use in 14 so it's a bit harder if all the abilities they've so far in lore used are off limits.