Lily.1935

> @"Robert Gee.9246" said:

> Wow this got really big really fast. Unfortunately I don't think I can reply to everyone individually but here are a few thoughts on some of the stuff that's come up multiple times:

> * Health Sacrifice - This would be thematic to necromancers and it's something we've experimented with in the past, unfortunately it didn't end up playing very well. The main reason it doesn't work too well is because of the prevalence of healing currently in the game. With large parties and dedicated healing specs in the game it's very difficult to have health sacrifice values that are fair in all situations. Balancing lifesteal to offset a health sacrifice cost ends up blowing out sustain as soon as any outside healing gets involved. Scourge's life force cost on skills is one way we've found to have a pseudo-health cost since it can't be influenced by outside factors, although it doesn't have the same feel as true health cost would.

I'd like to hear more about this testing you've done before. If you don't mind me picking your brain for a moment. Health Sacrifice skills were always a tough balancing act for the player in GW1. But I'm wondering if perhaps there are methods to make them work? My thought on health sacrifice would be that it would take a fixed number and not a percentage. Or if it was a percentage that its impact could be scaled with health sacrificed. Beyond that I feel that the solution to this issue could be allowing utility in shroud. But I want to hear your thoughts.

On the primary note that I've been pushing for though, Allowing for utility in shroud at the cost of Life force, I feel that this could have interesting design choices for the core profession. For example, at the moment Vital persistence is the best trait in its tier. There really isn't competition here at all, but that isn't because the trait is too good. So what if we replaced the other two traits with something that has to do with life force? A good example would be a pet trait of mine called Cultist's fervor. A trait that I've described as "Spend more life force on skills that us it and when you spend life force X happens." Don't know X could be but I feel that having 3 traits that offered 3 different modes of play could be quite interesting. One that's defensive, one about speed and the last about power. Just an idea to stew over.

Having Utility in shroud that would spend life force and traits to go along with spending life force actually wouldn't require a change to how Scourge functions either. Which would be interesting for Core and reaper as well as scourge without having to redesign anything on scourge. As I've said before, I think Scourge is amazing. The only thing that could hold it back imo is some lack of meaningful synergy with some of the core specs.

Oh boy... So many comments. I want to respond to quite a few and when I get to my computer I absolutely will. But I can't at the moment since my phone isn't exactly good for long responses.

On another note a few people are starting to get off topic. I'd ask that we please stay on topic. Thank you.

> @Sorra.1735 said:

> > @Lily.1935 said:

> > I main necromancer as well but I do often play other professions. My second most played profession would be engineer with Mesmer trailing not too far behind. Engineer is unforgiving in terms of its rotation and abilities, being a highly complex class that asks a lot from the player while Mesmer is an extremely deep class that rewards very skilled play. I think they're a good contrast to each other that are perfect examples of what this post is about. On one hand we have a class that is more complex than deep and on the other hand we have one that's more deep than complex. And then we have necromancer that is neither deep or complex. Of course this excludes scourge from that as I feel scourge is quite deep.

>

> The first classes i ever tried in a free weekend (dont remember which year it was) was an engineer and mesmer. I really dont know why i didnt go with engi when i bought the game :s . Altho my second most played character is guardian i only play him in pvp and wvw. Third is a mesmer but how can i compare 115 hours to almost 800 on my necro?

> Btw the post is really nice :).

This might sound bad but I have close to 6000 hours in the game and almost 4000 of that is necromancer with close to 800 on engineer and 600 on Mesmer.... XD

> @Oakwind.6187 said:

> So here's a hypothetical question: What if we could use 6-0 skills while in Shroud **BUT** that would cost you actual health in % like some skills did in GW1? Specifically so that you could rely on extra utility but you'd come out of Shroud a bit weaker. What if I could use Plague Signet while in shroud but it would cost me 17% of my actual HP (ignoring shroud)?

This is more in lines with what we could expect for an elite spec. Sacrifice skills have been long requested for the necromancer and I don't personally feel that an idea like that could be done justice with our current set up.

However, I will note that traits relating to sacrifice could be quite cool for blood magic. I personally think though that linking it to life force spending g could allow for more cross synergy with scourge and the core using traits since scourge already has life force spending abilities and core hypothetically having them would justify a trait that says "when you spend life force X happens".

> @Sorra.1735 said:

> > @Lily.1935 said:

>

> > As that stands though, this sort of style philosophy pushes the player who decides to make the necromancer their main into a pretty bad position if they decide to get into the depth of the game. Its giving the player a profession with training wheels and expecting the player that they have to be aware that if they' want to advance in the game they'll have to give up their main and start focusing on a profession with a higher skill ceiling. But as it stands the 9 professions are so different and necromancer's defenses are so drastically different from the other professions that it can be like relearning the game all over again with far less to translate over from the necromancer.

> >

>

>

> THIS. This is exactly my problem. I choose to main necro from the very start and i kind of regret it. I love my necromancer but when i try to play other classes i have a tendency to make them "tough" which i understand as: see group of mobs -> pull all of them -> stand in red circles, dont evade, heal a lot and kill everything without really doing something. When i try to play more offensive (glass cannon) builds i die a lot and i get so frustrated that i just return back to my necro. I know how to dodge, i know how certain types of mobs work and i know that if i want to live i gotta kill them asap. But when i miscalculate i end up dying because i didnt know they could hit so much that half of my HP bar on my Berserker warrior (condi) is gone in one hit. I think my problem is that when i played WoW i used to be a tank or a healer, i never really played a dps class and when i came to GW2 i was confused. Thus i choose necromancer and found what i was looking for: class that is hard to kill and still does fairly good damage to solo things. But now i truly regret it. I really feel like i need to relearn the game but its just so hard to let my main go and choose another class.

I main necromancer as well but I do often play other professions. My second most played profession would be engineer with Mesmer trailing not too far behind. Engineer is unforgiving in terms of its rotation and abilities, being a highly complex class that asks a lot from the player while Mesmer is an extremely deep class that rewards very skilled play. I think they're a good contrast to each other that are perfect examples of what this post is about. On one hand we have a class that is more complex than deep and on the other hand we have one that's more deep than complex. And then we have necromancer that is neither deep or complex. Of course this excludes scourge from that as I feel scourge is quite deep.

> @kKagari.6804 said:

> Alas, I can't see any ways to make Necromancer's play any differently to the low reward gameplay it has currently.

>

> I agree there needs to be passive gameplay elements, but I simply think Necromancers have too many of them. It doesn't have the skills that are useful in multiple situations that other classes have, nor the non-linear rotations classes like engineers and elementalists have. A lot of the Necromancer's playbook is fire-and-forget.

>

> And don't get me wrong, every game is going to have the easy-to-play option, and I think Necromancer is definitely that option, for Guild Wars 2.

That's why I started the post. A group of people working together to solve a problem is far more effective than a single person. I'm sure we can come up with some amazing ideas.

Also I think ranger and warrior both fit that role as well. They are extremely easy to pick up and grasp the difference is that they do have more depth even though they can be just as easy to use as necromancer.

> @"Robert Gee.9246" said:

> This is a pretty cool discussion so far. I'm interested to see where it goes.

>

> > @Lily.1935 said:

> >One suggestion I've been pushing for years is to have your skills 6-0 always available to you, even when in shroud, but with a hefty cost. I've suggested that if Necromancer was to gain this utility it shouldn't be for free.

> Currently the "cost" for using these skills is that you need to drop out of shroud in order to use them. Rather than paying lifeforce, you are putting your defensive ability on recharge.

>

>

> > @kKagari.6804 said:

> > A majority of our GM traits are passive in effect, or doesn't have the two pronged effects that Cleansing Ire has. To increase skill ceiling, and depth for necro, changes should start from core specs; there are simply too many passive GM traits.

> I think it's okay to have some passive and simple GM traits. And some passive traits like Parasitic Contagion can act as keystone traits that players can build and play around. It would be informative to hear some specific examples of the traits you're worried about.

OMG! A dev responded to my post! Now that my fangirlling is out of the way I can discuss this properly.

I actually don't disagree with you that there is some risk in the cost of putting shroud on cool down. What I will disagree with is that that is a major cost. It's only a 10 second cool down. The risk of doing that isn't honestly that high in my opinion and it's a fairly black and white choice.

Let's contrast this with my suggestion for a moment. You still have this choice available to you. But now you have some other options. Let's say that the cost of the utility usage was 15% and the elite cost was 25%. Extremely high costs that could burn through life force in a matter of seconds. Looking at it from this angle the choice becomes far more meaningful. You could drop out to use your utility and put your shroud on a 10 second cool down or you could pay that cost. As it stands now life force on many builds can take far longer to build up than just 10 second so you'd have to weigh your options. Do I rip a hole in my defenses to push harder, do I drop out and risk heavy damage, or do I turtle in shroud and not take those chances? And it can very further than just that.

Also. Personally I don't think passive play is all bad. It isn't. It has its place.

> @Tobias.8632 said:

> Staff tempest is also pretty easy, and far more powerful. I have one of those for clearing KC and no-upgors and I would say it's an easier rotation then the current viper reaper build. I've never played a warrior but I've gotta be like how hard can any of its rotations be when it doesn't have access to any toolbelt or attunement style weapon set changes, at least necro has shroud.

I think the difference here is that the Elementalist has the option of deeper gameplay. Just because it has a point where it simpler to play than Necromancer doesn't mean that's the case overall. And Warrior does require some weapon swapping and berserk mode triggers to be most effective.

But I'm more concerned with depth, not complexity. There is a difference in this distinction which I might have failed to express. A video posted by a Youtube Channel called Extra Credit explains the distinction quite well and I can recommend their video if you'd like?

> @Kaladel.1670 said:

> Well, after reading this part of your post I was anticipating a suggestion related to Corruption skills or something similar :

> > @Lily.1935 said:

> > Although this isn't true all the time, Blood is power traited for Master of corruption is a high risk skill with low reward for its correct use.

>

> And the shroud part surprised me.

> I have some ideas (probably badly balanced and vaguely redundant with Corruption since I feel the theme of sacrifice and blood magic are underexploited) but they'll have to wait until tomorow, since it's pretty late here and I have a hard time explaining them right now (english not being my first language doesn't really help).

Look forward to it. I'd love to dive deeper into these ideas, since i have some myself, but my ideas are more elite specialization territory and not relating to the topic at hand. I'd love to see what you come up with though. I'll make a post in the future about elite specs later. But for now, I'll just wait and see what you have to say.

I'd like more options. Like having Marjory or Taimi. Or even the Scourge icon.

> @kKagari.6804 said:

> Yeah, I think a few years back Arenanet already agreed that Necromancers are an easy class to play, and that won't change. You're not likely going to get much depth based on that.

>

> But to be a successful necromancer in pvp, you actually need a fundamental understanding of positioning. Its not exactly class specific but, for instance, rangers, not so much.

I'm not so much pushing for a major change in how new players play them, but requesting depth for the players who want to master the profession. Arena net have flip flopped on the necromancer quite a bit, and I personally feel that the high skill high reward option is what they should push for future elite specializations. And the request for Utility in shroud has been a long standing one I've been an advocate for for about 4 years I believe.

> @Kaladel.1670 said:

> While I agree with the idea behind this post and find it really interesting, I don't think your suggestion is the only thing that can be done about it.

> We probably need something that push the idea of high risk high reward further.

Sure, I agree. I have quite a few suggestions relating to that idea, but as for this post I was already rambling for quite a while and didn't want to push everything at once. But! Because you've got me curious now. I'd love to hear some of your ideas. :) If you don't mind.

> @vicious.5683 said:

> But why? Anet is going to ignore it anyway.

I understand that sentiment, but you know what they say about squeaky wheels.

The draft is saved, but the issue is some of the information that was on it is outdated. I don't mind reopening the discussion but as for a repost? If enough people want that I can do that, but I'd rather push discussion that is a bit more relevant. And I also feel that if I reopen the discussion and can make a new post that expresses those ideas a bit better that's more up to date.

If enough people want me to repost it I'll absolutely do it.

I figured this will be a great post to submit for the necromancer forums and with this new format it should be easier for me to make chances. This Discussion will be regarding to the necromancer's Depth and complexity. while Compare that to its GW1 counterpart. I'll also be discussing how the Scourge in this post but this is using that as a comparison to the GW2's necromancer history.

**The Depth problem**

To start this off, the necromancer is a fairly shallow profession. I know this sounds like a negative thing to say, but bare with me for the moment. When it comes to difficulty of execution and pay off the necromancer's abilities are fairly low risk and low reward. Although this isn't true all the time, Blood is power traited for Master of corruption is a high risk skill with low reward for its correct use. When comparing this to professions like thief, mesmer or even warrior it becomes clear that playing well on them or even mastering them is rewarding because a player can dive far deeper into that class and find powerful strategies that lets them go beyond what's expected of them or at least have the illusion that they go beyond. The necromancer hasn't had this sort of gameplay.

As they stand now, Necromancer is a low risk low reward profession that rewards passive play on the lower levels of things like PvP and PvE, while at high end PvP this passive play that the necromancer has been taught to use becomes a liability but with the mechanics of the profession it doesn't offer much room for improvement on the player's part. What you see is what you get. While lets compare this to the mesmer. A profession with a high skill ceiling. Many players when the pick up mesmer assume its a fairly weak profession that's easily taken down. But as the skill of the player grows with it they eventually realize just how much control and sustain the profession actually has.

Contrast that with the necromancer. Necromancers are fairly slow, straightforward and have very few defensive options. Because of this players quickly learn the gaps in the professions armor and its short comings. Its a very simple profession for people to just pick up and use but because of this it sacrifices so much of the depth that the GW1 necromancer was known for in favor of of this user friendly necromancer we see in GW2. Now I'm not saying this is inherently a bad thing. The passive game play and simplicity allows for the necromancer to be a menace in low end PvP and WvW which rewards this sort of profession.

As that stands though, this sort of style philosophy pushes the player who decides to make the necromancer their main into a pretty bad position if they decide to get into the depth of the game. Its giving the player a profession with training wheels and expecting the player that they have to be aware that if they' want to advance in the game they'll have to give up their main and start focusing on a profession with a higher skill ceiling. But as it stands the 9 professions are so different and necromancer's defenses are so drastically different from the other professions that it can be like relearning the game all over again with far less to translate over from the necromancer.

**The Scourge**

The Scourge is a fairly interesting elite spec when we compare it to the core profession. As an Elite it is far deeper in terms of its gameplay than the necromancer. As it stands now, it has 3 active defensive abilities on its bar at all time, along with the Aoe fear which can be activated without the use of a Shade. This opens up the door to new options and new ways to seriously screw up. This is a good thing! Because of the depth problem that the necromancer has at its core it doesn't offer a reward for high skilled play. While the Scourge is far less passive in its execution and far more active in its gameplay. I've described it as "Necromancer's Crossing over with engineer" which I feel is an apt description of it. Engineer, being one of the most complex professions while necromancers being one of the simplest. Because of this you get a resource hungry monstrosity that has the unique flavor of the necromancer with a bit of that Engineer depth. The Scourge addresses the necromancer's problem with depth and provides players a means to grow and expand with the profession.

Why I'm in love with the concept of the scourge is because it moves the player back to the days of the GW1 cursing necromancer. Although that spec in GW1 didn't have much field control, it was quite taxing on your opponent and rewarded you for being aware of your surroundings. GW1 necromancer was loved because of its depth in use and the scourge gives players a bit of this back. While it doesn't offer everything the necromancer desires it is a start.

**Guild Wars 1 Necromancer**

When we compare the guild wars 2 necromancer to its Guild wars 1 counterpart the Guild wars 2 necromancer up until this point was necromancer in name only. The GW1 necromancer was a very bursty, controling and damaging profession that ripped holes into its own defenses in order to expose weaknesses of its foes and unlock great power. Because of this the necromancer was a very difficult profession to play and master in the first game, rewarding player for very risky behavior that we haven't seen since. Holosmith seems to be closest to this style. And that isn't the first time I've compared engineer to GW1 necromancer and it likely wont be the last.

When Guild Wars 1 necromancer mains were making the transition to Guild Wars 2 the necromancer was a shock to them. Where was the risk? Where was the reward? It just wasn't there. Arena net advertised the necromancer as a high skill profession, a statement we haven't heard in a long time and likely for good reason. Arena net seems to have gone with the GW2 necromancer as a user friendly profession while the GW1 necro players have been starved for that gameplay they left behind from GW1.

Arena net still seems to have some of the core philosophy still buried into the GW2 necromancer. Corruptions being more in line with GW1 necromancer's theme and being fairly odd for the GW2 necromancer when you honestly think about what its trying to do. I'd like to see arena net push further down this path and give us the Power at any cost profession we fell in love with in GW1.

**Suggestion for Core**

I've harped on for a while about how the core profession is a low skill low reward profession. But I honestly believe that it doesn't have to be. It can still be user friendly while adding a bit of depth to it. One suggestion I've been pushing for years is to have your skills 6-0 always available to you, even when in shroud, but with a hefty cost. I've suggested that if Necromancer was to gain this utility it shouldn't be for free. That using these skills in shroud should cost you life force and that the healing skill shouldn't provide health but still maintain its secondary effect.

The Advantage of this would be that the necromancer player needs to make a very interesting decision that GW1 necromancer had to make all the time. Do I sacrifice my defenses for this utility? Which is an extremely meaningful question. And although their defenses would still be quite different when compared to the other professions in the game, this would set up a means to teach new players about rewarding gameplay that involves sacrifice while still letting them play at the lower ends with that level of passivity.

Depth promotes enjoyment of a profession. And Complexity is good to an extent, but what you want is depth. Although this is by no means a small change to the profession. It does open up some very interesting prospects to the core and reaper that could allow them to compete with the level of depth that the Scourge provides.

With that said, I think this post is done. A bit of a long one, but tell me what you think. DO you have something to add? I'd be happy to hear from all of you.