D4: Druid pets not on par w/ Necro

General Discussion
2

Necro has always been THE pet class in the Diablo series.

As much as I dislike D4 and the (mis)directions they ran it towards, it really is fine for certain classes to have certain identities. In fact, the greatest mistake D2 ever made was putting Teleport on Enigma.

3

Be it as it may, my point is that there isn’t a good reason for this to be the case other than because they say it should be so. There’s no reason why there shouldn’t be parity, especially when your consumers is asking for it.

4

I would go as far as saying teleport with no cooldown. Flying through a dungeon was an odd choice but it is what it is.

5

I gave you a good reason, you just don’t agree with it. Which is fine, not everything has to be for everyone. But if YOUR literal only reason for complaining is:

Well, I’m a consumer asking for Necros to be SUPERLATIVE as the pet class. I want DISparity in that regard.

Now, our sample size between us is only 2, split even at 50/50. I suppose, if you were to poll however many active players are in D4 (or hell, even IN-active such as myself) and find out if “more than half” of the people agree with YOUR side of the coin, that might be clear evidence devs should listen to your point of view.

Elsewise, it’s just you, wishing druids had better pets, and me, wishing necros were the ONLY ones who had good pets.

6

Well

That’s just plain ol’ selfishness/self-centeredness. Again, there’s no good reason why there can’t be parity. And I don’t play D4, nor would I enjoy playing druid if I did, I’m merely pointing out the obvious.

7

Why don’t you ask on the Diablo IV forums…

5 Likes
8

Because I don’t need to go that far, the disparity existed here in D3 long before it did in D4. And I’m just pointing out that it continues.

1 Like
9

Go play Skyrim. Every single character can do everything.

Or, play a Diablo game, where only certain characters can do certain things.

YOU don’t like how class identity works. That’s an ish-you, not an ish-me.

10

I don’t entirely follow. Acknowledging of course that you said class…

  • Marauder Demon Hunter is pretty much a pet spec, between summoning the entire stable (possibly twice) and the sentries.
    In Heroes, Valla has no pet.
  • Witch Doctor abilities often summon things.
    In Heroes, his abilities are spiders, zombies, toads and gargantuan.

Both of these were a thing before Necromancer was added to D3.
Sure, D2…

Xul just has a passive summon as a side effect of his Q and E ability, plus one of the heroic options. Which is on par with calling Wizard Hydra a pet spec.

Which says to me that - by the late 2010s - the necromancer identity was more of a mix between poisoning and skeletons.

Partially poisoned by having seen how games work internally, I think about classes as themes, not abilities.

  • Archers shoot arrows, mages shoot shards, necromancers throw bones.
    Projectile for 3 + MainStat damage.
  • DH has furry followers, WD has creepy followers / summons, necro has animated / undead followers / summons.
    Melee minion for 1 + MainStat damage and X movement speed.
11

Then surely you wouldn’t have an issue with Wizard using WhirlWind? Or with Necro using Shapeshifting? Or with Barb’s using crossbows?

If you want a game where anyone can do anything EQUALLY as well as anyone else, play Skyrim. Skyrim is an awesome game! I’ve played it many, many times. I own it like 3 times over.

I don’t have the numbers in front of me because I’ve never done a formal poll, but I’m willing to bet the people who want to play Skyrim… are playing Skyrim. NOT attempting to turn a D3 game into Skyrim.

1 Like
12

I think of it as wanting to take good aspects of something or ideas and meshing them with an existing entity to make it better.

I agree, when people in the D4 forums say “I wish the game had…” and list literally everything D3 has, the first thought is “just play D3”. If someone suggests something particular this game did right and wouldn’t mind seeing that in the successor, that’s not so bad

13

The key difference here is said “existing entity” exists. It is well established. It has certain core aspects that comprise its identity. Half the reason WD got so much hate on launch was that people wanted Necro and they got WD instead.

I really like the concept of auras. Should Druid get those?

I really like the concept of traps. Should Druid get those?

I really like the concept of chocolate covered bananas. Should Druid get those?

At a certain point, you have to stop slipping down the slope and realize, this ain’t that kind of game. It’s not even that kind of GENRE. D3 is one of the most accessible Diablo games there ever were, where you really only need ONE character per class per realm type. On D2 you could make 6 or so Sorcs and they’d ALL be different, “thematically” speaking. Orb vs Hydra vs Chain Lit vs Enchantress (yes, it did work if you had good enough gear) vs Meteorb vs Blizz-Ball vs probably others I can’t even remember right now.

I don’t need to add poison nova to the list, just because “well it’d be cool if Sorcs could poison nova.”

14

Traps? No

Bananas? Absolutely!

I get what he’s saying. Some forget this isn’t a sandbox RPG. I’m fine with adopting good practices and not reinventing the wheel.

I mean, if someone really… really wanted that while playing Diablo, they could play D2R and give their Sorc a breath of the dying staff…

15

I’m fine with enriching the game as well. Like, having the Druid able to use fire related skills, is totally fine. Even though fire sorcs exist. And having them able to summon (nature themed) pets is fine, even though summonmancers exist. And yea, I get that mechanics-wise, a minion’s a minion and a magic projectile is a magic projectile.

But like, I don’t want assassins to suddenly start adopting pally auras. You know?

16

Yeah, I agree with that. That’s something I’m glad that was left in D2. Everyone with teleport, barbarians being werebears…

17

You’re arguing an argument that isn’t being had. Somewhere you took a left and got lost.

The argument that I presented was that damage be on par with every class. Not…

Druid and Necro should be equally powerful in there damage output. One shouldn’t be “SUPERLATIVE as the pet class”. Not to mention that every class has pets, technically making them all “pet classes”, rendering your statement incoherent. “Identity” isn’t harmed by what I’m proposing. The matter at hand is that Blizz likes to box in player into play how THEY say we ought play, rather than giving us the power/freedom to choose.

18

You titled this topic “D4: Druid pets not on par w/ Necro”

And here’s your original post:

Where on earth do you get “damage should be on par with every class” from that? Nowhere, unless you’re counting the part of the field beyond the goalposts you keep moving.

Then when I say this:

You say the following:

I don’t see “damage” mentioned literally anywhere by you just yet. Let’s keep going. When I then said:

You once more neglected to mention literally ANYTHING regarding to damage:

Though you DID mention you don’t play D4. So why did you title this topic about D4? :person_shrugging:

Here’s your next post:

Another post, another LACK of mention about “damage.”

I mention you might be better off playing Skyrim, I get into a tangent with some other people, and then you FINALLY, at post SEVENTEEN, mention the word “damage.”

Okay, fair enough. Druid and Necro should be equally powerful in their damage output. I actually legitimately agree with you there.

19

Touche, every class has pets so I assumed that it was clear that the disparity was the damage output, my apologies.

1 Like
21

You obviously didn’t read through this short thread. Read before you ask questions for answers that already exist.

23

You’re fine.

It wasn’t drama until that metermaid or whatever came in. It was a serious thread but any kind of thread can get heated.

I think DieHarder is just annoyed. Don’t take it personal.

2 Likes