Instead of Frost, Blood, and Unholy I feel that the class could have been named differently but have been composed of a Death Knight, Vampire, and Necromancer specs respectively.
What are your thoughts and what would you call this re-imagined class?
2 Likes
I don’t really like this particular idea but I appreciate what you were going for. I think there is too much going on with the subclasses unless you are just changing the names and nothing else. In which case, sure. Those are fine names. Not sure what I’d call the class.
1 Like
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
13 Likes
I’d rather they unify the class more than make it odd things
Every DK is supposed to be a master of necromancy, disease, etc
The new talent trees kinda cut us apart
1 Like
I like them the way they are. Tired of reimaginations.
3 Likes
What if we fixed them by making them alive? This way them having a breath meter underwater will now make sense 
“Life knights”
1 Like
I understand your reasoning is that you don’t agree with the names given to the Death Knight specs…but as a user of complex software for a living, I can’t begin to tell you how TIRED I am of developers changing things, just for the sake of change.
2 Likes
“Death Knight” makes no sense as the Frost spec. Death Knight abilities from the previous Warcraft games (and from vanilla WoW) were primarily focused in Unholy, e.g., Death Coil, Death and Decay, Raise Dead.
The proper Scourge units for each tree would be Lich, San’layn (or Dreadlord, I suppose), and Necromancer or Death Knight.
4 Likes
Fair enough. I suppose kelthuzad does use frost but I always just thought of him as a frost mage. I mostly associate death knights with the frozen throne and frost mourn. That’s why I identified it with the frost spec.
While I agree that at least the Frost spec deserves a total redesign I think the current way the DK functions is fine. They specialized based on their runes.
Also I think necromancers deserve their own class. Especially considering they were supposed to be a class together with the DK.
I basically play an unholy DK as a melee spell caster that also raises undead pets. In other words a necromancer.
So Frost, Blood, and Unholy but with different names? Why? We don’t call the Mage’s specializations Arcanist, Cryomancer, nor Pyromancer.
The classic reductionism in a pitiful attempt to dismiss common sense. In others words a forumite.
5 Likes
I don’t think DK really needs a re-imagining. Your stated one doesn’t seem like it would change much other than the names? which I would be open to letting people change client side if they would like. Blood (vampire), Frost (Death Knight), Unholy (Necromancer). Other than semantics what changes are you suggesting?
Don’t worry, I read your comment before you deleted it. 
2 Likes
Yes it does because one of the iconography of death knights is the Lich King and his powers of frost considering that his base lies in Northrend.
Frost plays with that part of the class fantasy
my comment added nothing to the conversation so got rid of it but wanted to acknowledge what you said RIGHT before me hah
Those are fantastic. I support this 100%.
The original description of Blood was an Champion of the Ebon Blade who rendered flesh and bone from their enemies to sustain them in combat. Not really vampiric, they just have spell names with vampire themes.
I feel that Unholy is a better name for DK because yes while the classic Necromancer does summon the dead and use diseases, Unholy can transform the minions making them kind of Necromancer+ if you will.
Idk what the heck you would call Frost DK though.
1 Like
At the very least you are consistent. There are company jobs perfect for you where you can make all the unnecessary changes you want and still somehow earn a salary. Cheers.
I’m a software engineer.
This isn’t software engineering.
It’s a “what if” forum topic that’s not at all serious. It’s just for the fun of the discussion.