Necromancer: Discussion of the dead

[KoujiGeki]

I know its not like its being forced that you have to play the job, if you dont like dont play it dont ruin it for everyone. You dont see me saying that SE has Cor and Ranger to use so there is no need at all for a Musketeer class. Musketeer is something new and awesome for the people who like ranged jobs. So more power to the people who wanna play it.

Or are just whm just scarred of a possible secondary healer that has a pet that can dd? or have possible powerful dots with it? You know kinda do what a Whm and be just as good? Kinda like how most Blm feel about Whm? Like "why can Necs be just a good healers when they should primarily be DDs?"


Don't ruin it for the rest of us wanting new things along with the older jobs.

[Duuude007]

(Sil'dih empire may or may not be completely destroyed)

This has been overtly shown as at the very least a city turned long buried necropolis. The only two map coordinates referenced are:

*Initial Monk quest lies on a site once known to be the former location of the city. No architecture of any kind remained as of the end of 1.0.

* Sil'dih Aqueducts, seen deep within the copperbell mines. The nature of an aqueduct is to supply potable water over long distances, so its positioning is not totally unusual.

The only other clue of Sil'dih is the possibility that the ancient ruins in Thanalan concept art ARE those of the lost city, although this alone is conjecture.

That said, I would welcome the idea of seeing Ul'dah being decimated, and the residents fleeing, ultimately resettling at this city which appears built into the cliffs of a chasm.

[Laume]

...Wow, this escalated rather quickly. I guess I'll throw in my thoughts, then? Though I'm a bit hesitant to give it given the fact that for the last 3 pages you've been ripping each other's heads off. /readies flame shield

...Why not add Necromancy? The ability to turn defeated, non-boss enemies into undead thralls sounds awesome. Yes, they are generally considered as enemy classes, but that doesn't mean players shouldn't play as them. Not all players want to be the goody two-shoes "Teh warrieh oph laiiiighhhttt" generic good guys, and the game shouldn't force them into that role.

Necromancy is bad? Let it be bad. Let the players be bad if they want to. It sure would make for an interesting job questline. It's about time FFXIV embraced the antihero. Necromancers, Thieves, Ninjas, Assassins, Dark Knights, and the like.

Is it Final Fantasy-ish? Not really, but that shouldn't be an excuse not to add something. Yes, this is a Final Fantasy game, but the fact that it is shouldn't limit the game on what should be added. That makes for a creative nightmare. If the same mindset that people are now showing existed around Final Fantasy's infancy, then Cecil wouldn't have been a Dark Knight, the Onion Knight would have never existed, Final Fantasy Tactics would have been less interesting, Lightning wouldn't be a badass L'Cie, Cloud wouldn't be putting Materia onto his gear, Final Fantasy XII wouldn't have badass Star Wars ships, Laguna wouldn't use a gun, Final Fantasy XI would have but a few classes, and the series wouldn't fucking progress. This is a series that's based on putting new things into the Final Fantasy Formula, even pre-FFVII.

I'll put in my 2 cents to. IMHO (and this is just an opinion, not a fact in any way shape or form.) the lack of necormancy and/or the approach to jobs that FF has had is what separates FF from all the other rpg's in made in the western hemisphere. All the other rpg's have had this feeling like... it's hard to quantify... like power and greed is what works and what is good. Save only whom you care for, screw everyone else. Play a hero that can be the scum of the earth. While that's fine for some people, for me, final fantasy has always been a series where it highlights the best in humanity and friendship. Where I can take a break from all the doom and gloom of regular life. So I personally wouldn't like to see a necromancer (unless they find a REALLY good way to doing it. Pretty much redefining the necromancer that we all know of.)

With that said, Yoshiwalla is right in some aspects. Well, a lot of aspects. I would say that Cecil being a dark knight was required because he was the embodiment of rebirth (from dark knight to paladin). With that said, final fantasy did redefine Shiva (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva), Odin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin), Ifrit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ifrit), Bahamut, Leviathan, etc, etc, etc. Heck, what was blue mage before FF made it up? I mean, who here thought bards used arrows like bad-@ss before ff14? I was stuck using daggers, staves and singing in ff11. So, ultimately, I'll leave it up to the fans and the devs to decide about necromancer. I only ask that dark knight be done before necromancer does. And yes, I do want to see all the 1.0 original thm spells back in the game.

[Reika]

I'll put in my 2 cents to. IMHO (and this is just an opinion, not a fact in any way shape or form.) the lack of necormancy and/or the approach to jobs that FF has had is what separates FF from all the other rpg's in made in the western hemisphere. All the other rpg's have had this feeling like... it's hard to quantify... like power and greed is what works and what is good. Save only whom you care for, screw everyone else. Play a hero that can be the scum of the earth. While that's fine for some people, for me, final fantasy has always been a series where it highlights the best in humanity and friendship. Where I can take a break from all the doom and gloom of regular life. So I personally wouldn't like to see a necromancer (unless they find a REALLY good way to doing it. Pretty much redefining the necromancer that we all know of.)

With that said, Yoshiwalla is right in some aspects. Well, a lot of aspects. I would say that Cecil being a dark knight was required because he was the embodiment of rebirth (from dark knight to paladin). With that said, final fantasy did redefine Shiva (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva), Odin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin), Ifrit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ifrit), Bahamut, Leviathan, etc, etc, etc. Heck, what was blue mage before FF made it up? I mean, who here thought bards used arrows like bad-@ss before ff14? I was stuck using daggers, staves and singing in ff11. So, ultimately, I'll leave it up to the fans and the devs to decide about necromancer. I only ask that dark knight be done before necromancer does. And yes, I do want to see all the 1.0 original thm spells back in the game.

Of course in an RPG game, its natural for you to be the hero, weather youre a goody goody hero or a dark hero. RPG's like Infamous show how you could easily perform good actions, bad actions, or a combination of both to meet the same end - save the world.

A mod has commented that the devs themselves were thinking about a quest that you go through to change from PLD to DRK in FFXIV, thus losing the ability to be PLD. That would still be representing rebirth, in the other direction. It is a direction I would gladly go in if they did that. I kinda agree that they should add DRK before NEC, but it wouldn't be bad to see them both at the same time as a darkness package.

[Hanemakikaze]

I would ask that you please not misquote me. I was sating that the intentions of the primals are the intentions of the user who summoned it.

Also I should have made myself more clear. Right from the Final Fantasy Wiki (Source) disambiguation page:


Necromancer may refer to:

• A Job from Final Fantasy V Advance.
• An enemy from Final Fantasy V.
• An enemy from Final Fantasy VI.
• A summoner type enemy from Final Fantasy XI.
• The Job from Final Fantasy Airborne Brigade.
• An enemy from Chocobo's Dungeon 2.

Generally it is an enemy job. How can you refute that fact?

By that logic summoner wouldn't fit into the game either, how many enemies used summons throughout FF to destroy the world(or try to) or use them against you(aka your enemy)? Necromancer fits just as much as any other class, more so in this game than most others.

[Duuude007]

By that logic summoner wouldn't fit into the game either, how many enemies used summons throughout FF to destroy the world(or try to) or use them against you(aka your enemy)? Necromancer fits just as much as any other class, more so in this game than most others.

Players could use summon (or call) in FF 4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11, 12, and 13. Your counter argument is way off base.

[Hanemakikaze]

Players could use summon (or call) in FF 4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11, 12, and 13. Your counter argument is way off base.

What argument are you talking about exactly? Because I don't see one. I pointed out how silly that logic is, when in almost every game they are on both sides. The fact that people choose to limit themselves to generic typical classes that are reused in every game but grab a pitch fork when one of the less used ones come up for discussion is...I just find it hilarious.

And from what I read, peoples only "argument" against it is that they think it doesn't fit when they already play thm, and ask for dark knight which is by no means that far from necromancer. People on these forums are just silly as hell, is what I was saying. There is my so called counter argument I suppose.

[Powercow]

I really don't get what this obsession with adding necromancers is all about. It just seems to me that people want a class called "Necromancer" because they think it's cool to be the brooding goth guy.

There are much, much cooler class concepts that can be added, like Mathematician. That would be 100X more awesome and interesting than Necromancer.

[KoujiGeki]

Players could use summon (or call) in FF 4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11, 12, and 13. Your counter argument is way off base.

Well what they might be getting at is Summoner is not a defined class it can be both good and Evil, most lore to Necromancy itself which most people dont know is it stemmed from people wanting to bring back loved ones. The idea itself is a noble idea but most ignorant people only see it as evil. Absolutley anything can be used as a weapon, Necromancy just happens to have more evil users than good, the promise of Lichdom being a main cause of that.

And others games and lore allow necromancy to be practiced to keep it in line and in check, Like oblivion for example the second they banned necromancy in that world the practice of it became increased rather than smaller. You draw attention to things like at banning them and make people wonder why it was banned, next thing you know they are trying out necromancy.Or once again like Uldah to protect their city they raised the dead to prevent the citizens from dying.

Someone please answer this question. Why is it evil to protect lives by using dead peoples bodies as weapons to protect? The bodies are empty no souls nothing they are dead, rather than sacrifice young women and men who have the rest of their lives ahead of them.

Say your dying and i happen to be a "good" necromancer passing by if i could drain the life out of a tree or an animal,and give it to you to live am i evil? The tree or animal rots away i have disrupted nature to save your life you view me as evil?

Your child or loved one is dying from a disease. A necromancer is the master of life and death, disease and poisons. I could take the poison or disease killing them and plant in into a common house rat, killing it instead. Is it evil?

[Duuude007]

Your child or loved one is dying from a disease. A necromancer is the master of life and death, disease and poisons. I could take the poison or disease killing them and plant in into a common house rat, killing it instead. Is it evil?

Are we talking about FFXIV still, or the movie Green Mile?