Talk:Necromancy

Old discussion

SHouldn't we put a difference between "Alive" and "Undead" ? It's not really the same thing, you know.--K ) (talk) 01:24, 29 September 2006 (EDT)
That makes my brain hurt. You know what they mean, so it isn't really a problem ;P --Tinkerer 02:16, 29 September 2006 (EDT)

Yes, but what I know and don't know doesn't matter at all. This wiki was designed to bring information to every single person looking for accuracy about WoW. "I" am not the only one on earth, neither are you. This is community.

Ever consider again my proposition ?--K ) (talk) 03:17, 29 September 2006 (EDT)

Added Noth the Plaguebringer to the famous Necromancer list, seem fitting considering the sheer amount of skeletal minions he creates during the fight. --Wormsborough 10:07, 30 December 2006 (EST)

Necromancers

Just a thought but do you think the Vrykul could be necromancers? Necromancers (all that have the real necromancer model such as Gothik the Harvester) have animal bones, big beards , and are slightly bigger than a human, and the Vrykul serve the lich king... it's just a thought but I saw all the similarities and thought it was worth putting here. Cabeza

It nakes sense. Also Keleseth in Utgarde can summon skeletons. 6 of them I think Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

Kormok

Can we add Kormok to list of Necromancers? Mr.X8 17:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you?--SWM2448 17:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but I just want permission first Mr.X8 17:37, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

AAAAAAGGGHHHHHHHH WHAT DID I DO, PLEASE HELP!!!!! Mr.X8 17:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Wait I fixed it, at least I think it was me Mr.X8 17:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Necromancy

Necromancers are my life i get almost every gamethat has them lol but though all this iv learnt that there are sooo meny elements to necromancers and what they can do other then just raising the dead:

they lern about the human body and they spechalise in decay and i think necromacers could have the real Poison DoT's instead of magick curses so they could go into poison alot more they would be the first poison casting class but this wouldent be teher main attack.

Necromantic Runes.

Necromancers are the divition of good and evil, light and darkness so i dont think all there powers should be only darkness based and they would more manipulate the light like blood elf paladens do.

(in the next paragraph there may be some things that may upset... somepeople)

On the topic of raising the dead with necromancers there isent only one way eg. the necromancer could purely control a zombie or somthing like that with his pure arcane power but he could also do it with ermm the voodoo doll and while hes doing it this way he can only do it with one undead person But the undead person he is directly controlling with the doll is much Much more durable because the body is not working on the mucles anymore its just the necromancer moveing parts of the voodoo doll.

Games have kept afar from the parts of necromancy that would be a little to much for the player eg. the voodoo doll because to some people it would just seem to much like what the necromancer would be doing in real.. Life, also if blizzard went with somthing close to this it wouldent be suprising if they gave the necromancer the ability to control a humaniod for a small amount of time.

As for necromancer buffs there defenatly should be Bone armour but i hope they make a diffreant graphic for the spell "Bone armour" that is already in the game that i have seen some NPC's cast iv also seen a scroll that lets the player cast it not meny people know but necromancers are also told to have runes that they use to enchant items this might bring a wrong element to the game but the effects of the runes are known to:

• Give fear to those who are attacked by the item.(maybe for a small amount of time there is a chance for the wepon to fear the target)
• Do alot more damage to spirits eg. Deamons, Ghosts, and some undead,

ill probebly have to look up what the rest of the runes do.

lastly i hope bilzzard really does its reasearch if it makes necromancers in the game theres alot of things they can screw up eg. only focusing on re animation :/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Necromunger (talk · contr).

This isn't a discussion forum for ideas buddy. If you want to come up with your own idea for a Necromancer class, feel free to produce it in your namespace (i.e. User:Necromunger/Necromancer class idea) with the relevant fanfiction and speculation tags.

Nevertheless, the introduction of the Death Knight player class in Wrath of the Lich King is probably the closest we'll see in World of Warcraft. I wouldn't worry too much: I'm sure Blizzard will "do their research" and get it right, having already created 9 other (supposedly) balanced classes with a wide range of abilities. --User:Vorbis/Sig 17:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually the first accounts of necromancers were Demons who raised ELVES not humans, so the part about they know about the HUMAN anatomy should maybe be changed to something like most living creatures anatomy.   Mr.X8 Talk Contribs 05:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Fan Art

Orc Necromancer, by User:Xavius

Ashbringer

Is it just me, or does that very orc necromancer from the RPG picture appear in the Ashbringer comic, in the battle towards the end? Xavius, the Satyr Lord 14:58, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Necromantic magic isn't just Arcane

The Scourge and the Auchenai Necromancers didn't use Arcane magic to raise the dead, they used the Void. Ner'zhul taps directly into the Void in WoD (via The Dark Star) and his Necromantic abilities employs the Void, not Arcane. No where in the abilities' description does it state that Ner'zhul uses Arcane. Not all Necromancers are Mages, and Necromantic magic isn't always Arcane. That is canon, and should not be edited. None of the statements the Lore Historians made has retcon'ed the fact that Necromantic magic can come from the Void, and neither does the book in Dalaran.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 17:37, 16 September 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

While there are other spellcaster that are able to raise the dead, necromancy is more than that (as the Kirin Tor book's says). It also involves conjuring diseases, reparation of the undead's flesh, etc. That is why Necromancy is more of an species of the genus of magics that are able to raise the dead.

The Void-wielders of the Shadowmoon clan in AU Draenor indeed raise their dead, but none of those spellcasters is called "necromancer", but "necrolytes". In the MU, Necrolytes were non-magi that were trained in necromancy. Where's the proof that didn't happen in the Alternate Draenor? Cemotucu (talk contribs) 17:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

You're implying that Arcane is inherently Necromantic and that Gul'dan and his lesser Warlocks were also Mages, you can't be taken seriously, and that is all I need to know.

Ner'zhul's description states he has embraced the Void and the Necromantic arts, and how does he achieve his Necromantic abilities? By using the Void directly, he doesn't use Arcane magic. No where in the book in Dalaran states Necromancy can't be achieved through Fel or the Void. And no where in the Book in Dalaran does it state Necromantic magic is Arcane because it bends the Void. Again, you're implying Arcane is inherently Necromantic, and that is wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong.

You're just posting your self-made lore.

Necromancy refers to the study of magic involving the dead, not the type of magic that's used.

And you seem to be forgetting the fact that Gul'dan and his lesser Warlocks were called Necromancers as well as Necrolytes, and they were not Magi at all.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 17:59, 16 September 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

Necromantic magic can be Arcane, but it's not because it bends Void energy, that's retarded. If Arcane takes on the characteristics of the energy it bends, and if Arcane becomes Necromantic when it bends the Void then the Void is Necromantic. Stating that Necromantic magic can't be Void is asinine to the max.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 18:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

As necromancy is a school of arcane magic (as several sources state), then necromancer are magi (as several sources state), just like an Illusionist or a Transmuter are types of magi.

Since Gul'dan and his lesser warlocks studied necromancy, then it is not unbelievable they were magi, too (despite the fact of being warlock first and foremost). This is reinforced by the fact that Gul'dan taught his first created ogre mage how to use arcane magic.

And why does Ner'zhul's entry differentiate between "the Void and the necromantic arts"? Maybe because while tightly related, they are separate things? Necromancy is but a form of raising the dead, one in which arcane magic is involved. You can raise the dead and not perfom necromancy: like those necrophytes who infused demons into dead bodies. Cemotucu (talk contribs) 18:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Conjuration is called a School of the Arcane, but that doesn't mean it can't be a school of Fel. Conjuration is the study of SUMMONING things (The_Schools_of_Arcane_Magic_-_Conjuration), it doesn't have to involve Arcane magic. Warlocks who are called Summoners are Conjurers. Warlocks who use demonic magic to CONJURE things are Conjurers.

For example: http://www.wowhead.com/npc=42691/stonecore-rift-conjurer#abilities

A Pyromancer can be someone who uses the Arcane to bend elemental fire or someone who uses elemental fire straight from the source of the elemental fire.

A person can wield Arcane magic without being a Mage, just like how a person can wield Fel magic without being a Warlock. And the concept of Fel magic has not been implemented in Warcraft 1, 2, and even 3. Warcraft 1 and 2 states Gul'dan was trained in the arcane arts by Kil'jaeden and another piece of the manual states that the non-Necromancer Warlocks wielded Arcane powers.

Just because Gul'dan taught Arcane magic to Ogres doesn't mean he was a Mage himself. In ToD, Gul'dan explained the workings of Shamanism, but that doesn't mean he was still a Shaman, going back to what I stated earlier, someone can wield Arcane magic without being a Mage.

And Ner'zhul's journal entry "differentiates" Void and the Necromantic arts because "the Void" is referring to the energy he is using, the "the Necromantic arts" is referring to what he is doing with the energy he is using.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 18:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

There are two problems:

The first problem is that there is no official source explaining the WHY. WHY is Necromantic magic Arcane?

Arcane can't be Necromantic because it bends the Void. It can't be Necromantic because it bends the Void because that would mean Arcane is Necromantic when it bends other energies, and that is absolutely not true.

Arcane magic doesn't become something more when it bends different energies, it has been established that Arcane can take on the characteristics of the energies it bends, so if Arcane becomes Necromantic when it bends the Void, then Void is Necromantic.

The second problem is that Necromantic spells are shown to be either Purple like Void spells or Green like Fel spells and they do the same thing as Void or Fel spells. According to canon, Arcane is Purple or White and it's not the same as Fel.

Fel is created by draining/sacrificing life and manifests as a sickly Green. Spells such as Death Coil and Unholy Armor are called Necromantic spells in canon and they are created by draining/sacrificing life and they manifest as a sickly Green.

If they are created exactly the same way, looks exactly the same way, and does the same exact thing, what's the difference? That's the question that needs to be answered.

How hard is it for a Lore Historian to state Fel and Necromantic magic are two different types of magics because (inserts reason)? Whatever that silly reason might be..Hmphh *arrogant grin*VisionOfPerfection (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

Cemo, you need to get stopped/banned. I dare you to remove Gul'dan and Kil'jaeden being a Necromancer from their page. Gul'dan and Kil'jaeden were Necromancers and were not Mages. When you state Necromancer is a Mage sub-class, you are stating Gul'dan, his lesser Necrolytes, and his DK's were also Mages. You just need to stop, like right now.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 23:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

I'd just like to remind you which of you two has been getting progressively longer bans for their actions, before you go any further with this. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:07, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Why would I care? I'm rude because people are rude to me and not acknowledging cold hard facts. Cemo is implying that Gul'dan, his Necrolytes, and his Death Knights were Mages because he thinks Necromancer is a Mage sub-class. Gul'dan was a Necromancer, but he was not a Mage, and if you agree with Cemo, then why don't you list Gul'dan as a Mage as well? When I remove Gul'dan being a Necromancer it's so I can prove a point, which is that just because a Historian states something doesn't mean it's entirely accurate. I get banned because I'm rude to dumb dumbs who shouldn't be allowed to post here, and for no other reason.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 00:13, 16 October 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

Jandice Barov

@VisionOfPerfection: Scholomance is a necromancy school that teaches necromancers:

Individuals seeking to master the powers of undeath know well of Scholomance, the infamous school of necromancy located in the dark and foreboding crypts beneath Caer Darrow. In recent years, several of the instructors have changed, but the institution remains under the control of Darkmaster Gandling, a particularly sadistic and insidious practitioner of necromantic magic. Scholomance#Dungeon_Journal

The Barov family fell to Kel'Thuzad's charismatic influence and donated the keep and its crypts to the Scourge. The cultists then killed the Barovs and turned the ancient crypts into a school for necromancy known as the Scholomance. [1]

Jandice not teaching necromancy is irrelevant. She is an instructor in that school for necromancers and her students are referred to as magi, making the necromancers in that school magi:

Barov's spirit lurked in the recesses of Scholomance for years, but now she has taken a more active role in educating the next generation of magi. Jandice_Barov#Dungeon_Journal

The fact that there are demons roaming the halls is irrelevant. It is something being allowed by the necromancers in the school:

Constructs, spirits, and demons roam the halls untended. I must say that I expected more from such practiced necromancers as these! On_Scholomance

And your assertion itself is based on a false premise. Mages are capable of summoning demons without being Demonologists. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 19:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

1) Jandice is taking a more active role in educating the next generation of magi but she teaches Illusions, not Necromancy, they are two different arts, so clearly Scholomance isn't a school that teaches just Necromancy and no where does it state those magi training under her are also studying Necromancy, although it's likely that they are also studying Necromancy, you can't be 100% sure.

2a) Your assertion itself is based on a false premise. Necromancers are not Mages. You act like Necromancers are different from Warlocks, but they're not. Warlocks kill the living with the same magics as Necromancers and they do raise undead/spirits in canon. The only Warlocks who are unable to raise undead/spirits are the ones who don't know how to summon demons or void creatures via Soul Shards, which means they must be using Arcane magic to summon demons OR they are so powerful they don't need Soul Shards to summon demons.

2b) As I've stated Demonology and Necromancy are tied, if not the same thing (depending on how you summon demons). Lesser Warlocks have to kill/defeat demons then trap its soul into a soul shard to summon it, this is how the playable Warlocks obtain the ability to summon demons, you should know this from the vanilla quests. You kill the demon -> The demon is dead -> You trap its soul into a Soul Shard -> You summon its spirit (You summon/raise "the dead") -> Necromancy. Are you telling me the Lich King trapping Morgraine's soul in a Soul Shard then summoning it for his pleasure is not Necromancy but Demonology?

3) The page displays Necromancy being a School of Arcane magic and as a Mage sub-class, but Mages who become Necromancers are no longer Mages. Necromancer is not some Mage sub-class and Necromantic magic is not Arcane (you inferred that yourself). The ONLY sources stating Necromancy is Arcane is the Warcraft manual which also states Warlock magic is Arcane and that Necromancy was a school started by a Warlock and the book in Dalaran which states Necromancers harness the Shadows and is probably based off of the Warcraft manuals.

Trial of Shadow : Let us not be confined by the bounds of the mage repertoire of magic. I, for one, choose not to be classist. Necromancy can just be so much fun!

The Old Wizard's Almanac : Dwarves possess a moderate magical acuity, but tend to have difficulty at the higher echelons of wizardry. While they tend to focus more on priestly endeavors, a rare few have been known to dabble in arcane OR necromantic activitiesVisionOfPerfection (talk) 21:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

Not even sure what you're trying to argue. Scholomance is a necromancy school that teaches necromancers. Jandice is teaching in a necromancy school; her students are necromancers, but they are also referred to as magi. She herself not being a necromancer and her course not a necromantic art is irrelevant. She is teaching advanced illusions to necromancers.

There is more than one way to summon demons and mages have done it in the past. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 21:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. You're jumping to conclusions that EVERY single student LEARNS Necromancy in Scholomance, but you don't have enough evidence to prove so. Jandice does not teach Necromancy, she teaches Advanced Illusions and what does Illusions have to do with Necromancy? You should be smart enough to know that Scholomance doesn't teach just Necromancy and that there are non-Necromancers in Scholomance, like Jandice. Why would Jandice be the only non-Necromancer spellcaster in Scholomance lore-wise?

Yes, I know that there is more than one way to summon demons and that Mages have done so in the past, you should know this since we've discussed this before. There are three known ways to summon demons so far, and lesser Warlocks use Soul Shards to summon demons unless they use Arcane magic to summon demons, but you're forgetting that Jandice dropped the pattern on how to create a Felcloth bag to hold Soul Shards so obviously the Necromancers there were summoning spirits via Soul Shards. As I've stated Demonology and Necromancy are tied, if not the same thing (depending on how you summon demons). Lesser Warlocks have to kill/defeat demons then trap its soul into a soul shard to summon it, this is how the playable Warlocks obtained the ability to summon demons in the vanilla quests. You kill the demon -> The demon is dead -> You trap its soul into a Soul Shard -> You summon its spirit (You summon/raise "the dead") -> Necromancy. Are you telling me the Lich King trapping Morgraine's soul in a Soul Shard then summoning it for his pleasure is not Necromancy but Demonology? What is the damned difference between killing a Dreadsteed, capturing its spirit, then summoning its spirit and killing a human, capturing its spirit, then summoning its spirit?VisionOfPerfection (talk) 22:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection.

It being a school for necromancers means that the students are necromancers. Jandice isn't a student. And she's there because she holds allegiance to the Cult of the Damned; the keep itself was donated by her family. Just because it is a school for necromancy doesn't mean it can't also have courses in other useful fields. Tech universities have courses in humanities. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 22:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

You would think there would be at least one exception lore-wise or at least a few students who stray from the norm and just focuses solely on (studies) Illusions? /shrugs

Anyways, I stated it was most likely that Jandice's students also learn Necromancy.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 22:51, 10 November 2014 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

Definition of Necromancer

Why is my change to the Necromancer page being reverted? I've explained the error in calling Necromancers specifically mages. Someone is still suggesting that Gul'dan was a Mage and that the Necrophytes weren't really Necromancers.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 22:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection

Why split?

For a few years now, there's been {{Split}} notice on this article suggesting to split it into "Necromancy & necromantic as magic", but I'm not sure I understand why it should be split or what the difference between the two is. Isn't the magic type already basically covered by the Death page? -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 11:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

So now that we have more info on things in general a year later, I think maybe we could reasonably split Necromancy from Necromancer, given

1. Necromancy is used by both necromancers and death knights and others

2. Same way Life magic or Nature magic is separate from "Druids"/"Druidry"

3. It's odd on the "Schools of magic" template to have Necromancers be the only noun lol

User:Baalqliphoth(talk) 17:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Anyone who uses necromancy is a necromancer. I don't see what there is to say about the former that couldn't be included on a page about the latter and vice versa. I would just move the article to "Necromancy" and reorganize the lead section accordingly, and leave it at that. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 19:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good to me!User:Baalqliphoth(talk) 19:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it makes sense to split necromancy and necromancer. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:50, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

IMO, there should be a necromantic page, for the three reasons posted by Baal above. I don't think the Death page covers all that is the necrotic magic, and there is stuff that can compose the necromantic page. -- Mordecay (talk) 20:13, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I'd argue most of the page as-is would be the Necromancy/Necromantic page (I really wish Blizzard used the word "Necrotic" or something lol) while Necromancer would be the smaller page (the RPG necromancer stuff, the "Known" list, etc) since most of the page is just instances/history of necromancy. I'm partial to do doing such a page-surgery, and making this page "Necromantic" or "Necromancy" (Necromantic Magic would be odd as we don't use it for any of the other magics in the page title)User:Baalqliphoth(talk) 21:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I think it would be a really short page... but if it could have content beyond a note about how cosmologically important it is... then sure.--Sandwichman2448 (talk) 00:11, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

What would be the benefit in having a page about Death, a page about necromancy, and a page about necromancers? Information about necromancy as magic and information about the people who use necromancy and how it's been used historically are essentially the same thing, in my mind. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 18:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

IMO: Death = cosmic force and the concept of death, Necromantic = the magics of death, i.e. Necromancy, Domination, and Anima/its uses, Necromancer = the specific category of spell caster that uses Necromancy. Similar to Order vs Arcane magic vs Mage. User:Baalqliphoth(talk) 22:05, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I would go with "necromancy" over "necromantic." The former is a noun, the latter is an adjective. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 05:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Other magic types are also adjective words like holy or arcane. Chronicle uses necromantic to go along with the other magic types, holy, shadow, nature, arcane, fel, so I would lead toward that, and have necromancy redirect to necromantic. -- Mordecay (talk) 12:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The page, if it manifests, should be "necromantic magic" as it doesn't flow on its own like the others.--Sandwichman2448 (talk) 00:18, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Saying "necromantic" by itself is a type of magic is like saying "skeletal" is a type of undead. It might technically be correct, but the page is still at "skeleton." -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:33, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Not a split but a rename

Good evening, recently I took the opportunity to re-read the conversation above for the split, and I discussed it with a few editors on the discord. I was initially in favor of the Necromancy/Necromancers split, but after discussing it with DeludedTroll, he convinced me with good arguments that leaving the two together was a better fit. However, I remain on my position regarding the name, I think it would be more appropriate to rename the page to "Necromancy" or "Necromantic" (i don't know the good term in english as i am french but you have the idea) rather than boiling it down to "Necromancers". IMO, it would be more appropriate to make it a magic page rather than a class page, it's more correct to say "Necromancy is... which practiced by necromancers..." rather than "Necromancers are...who praticed necromancy which is...", especially in the case where the two are merged. It may be a little titillating, but I think it's necessary, especially following SL where we learned a lot about necromancy (its origin, use, etc...). I'm very interested in your opinions, so don't hesitate to tell me what you think about this! WardsJames (talk) 00:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)