I hate the witch doctor [Archive] - Page 2 - Diablo 3 & Diablo 2 Forums

NKlint

09-08-2008, 03:58

Ok the gameplay of the WD looks decent and he may very well be loads of fun. But he just plain looks goofy as hell. Something was bugging me about him, but I couldn't put my finger on it. What did he remind me of? Now I remember. (Sorry if someone else has made this connection before, but I'm not reading 26 pages.)

http://i34.tinypic.com/nycs2h.gif

It's a nice comparison and it makes him look very silly, if you're looking to base the origins of the Witch Doctor's design off of a cartoon parody and not based in reality.

Here are some real tribal "witch doctor-like" headdresses and people which I'm guessing was what Blizzard was basing it's new character class on. Some of the masks these cultures wear are very elaborate and beautiful. I'm posting these images because I don't think that Blizzard had Daffy Duck in mind when they were creating the Witch Doctor.

I certainly wouldn't want to get on their bad side :) Sometimes reality's bad-asses look kinda silly.
http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress04.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress04.jpg)http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress03.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress03.jpg)http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress02.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress02.jpg)http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress01.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress01.jpg)

Cast_Raider

09-08-2008, 04:16

NKlint

09-08-2008, 04:28

yes they do look very silly

really they look like they should be hawking fruit punch at a supermarket opening in yuppie suburbia or walking along the parade route during mardi gras in rio de janeiro handing out plastic beads to drunk sorority chicks, not slaying demons and saving the world

So long as we're making 'rash judgements based only on appearance...

The amazon from Diablo ii looks like she should be hawking lingerie at a Fashion Bug in Las Vegas or Door to Door during a lonely bachelor's "alone time" flinging bras to drunk fraternity jocks before a wet t-shirt contest, not slaying demons and saving the world.

Good thing Blizzard isn't submitting to these same preconceptions.

rrrrathmaberollinhisrs

10-08-2008, 01:09

So long as we're making 'rash judgements based only on appearance...

The amazon from Diablo ii looks like she should be hawking lingerie at a Fashion Bug in Las Vegas or Door to Door during a lonely bachelor's "alone time" flinging bras to drunk fraternity jocks before a wet t-shirt contest, not slaying demons and saving the world.

Good thing Blizzard isn't submitting to these same preconceptions.

The Barbarian looks like he should be hawking patented exercise equipment in the middle of the night on cable television or sitting in a gym bathroom putting cream on his bacne with his drunk-on-steroids muscle pals, not slaying demons and saving the world.

Frostraven

10-08-2008, 11:49

It's a nice comparison and it makes him look very silly, if you're looking to base the origins of the Witch Doctor's design off of a cartoon parody and not based in reality.

Here are some real tribal "witch doctor-like" headdresses and people which I'm guessing was what Blizzard was basing it's new character class on. Some of the masks these cultures wear are very elaborate and beautiful. I'm posting these images because I don't think that Blizzard had Daffy Duck in mind when they were creating the Witch Doctor.

I certainly wouldn't want to get on their bad side :) Sometimes reality's bad-asses look kinda silly.
http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress04.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress04.jpg)http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress03.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress03.jpg)http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress02.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress02.jpg)http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/th_TribalHeaddress01.jpg
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l4/NKlint/NKlint%202/TribalHeaddress01.jpg)

How many of those walk around with their head attatched to their chest with some serious chromosome disorder to boot?

OK
http://hogwartsprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/777/2007/09/witchdoctor1.jpg

AOK
http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/3588/witchdoctor2ts7.jpg

Notice that I didn't even screw up his legs, paint him green or make his arms too long.

Besides.

I've got a hopeless case of reality-disorder.
When something is in reality... and is silly, tribal, performed as we speak / common, and is without any spark of magic...
I simply cannot love it in fantasy.

Call it witch, and it would be fine.
Witches are mythical creatures that were feared and some people were burned accused of beeing witches.
Witch doctors on the other hand exist today, and noone would bother to burn one and noone above tvelve who's passed a single physics class would believe in their so called magic for a split second.

Real witch doctor zombies are/were poisoned people and are charlatans.
Which makes setting witch doctor zombies on fire a bit hairy.
They make toxins and perhaps even herbal medicine.
Some of them even do stuff only really devouted people in the rest of the world do; harm themselves to look bad-*** -- but cutting yourself IS a trend nowadays with all these emo-kids all around the place, so it's not really that bad-*** anymore either.

There can't be drawn any paralells to any other classes... as their names do not exist in any way shape or form in the real world, in their original form.

Besides -- Shaman == Witch doctor, and the name SOUNDS so much better.

NKlint

10-08-2008, 22:00

How many of those walk around with their head attatched to their chest with some serious chromosome disorder to boot?
*snip*
Notice that I didn't even screw up his legs, paint him green or make his arms too long.

Besides.

I've got a hopeless case of reality-disorder.
When something is in reality... and is silly, tribal, performed as we speak / common, and is without any spark of magic...
I simply cannot love it in fantasy.

Call it witch, and it would be fine.
Witches are mythical creatures that were feared and some people were burned accused of beeing witches.
Witch doctors on the other hand exist today, and noone would bother to burn one and noone above tvelve who's passed a single physics class would believe in their so called magic for a split second.

Real witch doctor zombies are/were poisoned people and are charlatans.
Which makes setting witch doctor zombies on fire a bit hairy.
They make toxins and perhaps even herbal medicine.
Some of them even do stuff only really devouted people in the rest of the world do; harm themselves to look bad-*** -- but cutting yourself IS a trend nowadays with all these emo-kids all around the place, so it's not really that bad-*** anymore either.

There can't be drawn any paralells to any other classes... as their names do not exist in any way shape or form in the real world, in their original form.

Besides -- Shaman == Witch doctor, and the name SOUNDS so much better.

Those pictures were in reference to the art design of their headdresses, not the size or shape of the Witch Doctor's neck.

As far as I could understand from your post (a jumble of fragmented sentences and no clear segue between statements) You don't believe that you could like a character that's based in reality. Then because an assassin, paladin, barbarian, amazon, paladin, druid, warrior, rogue, and (abstractly) a sorcerer are all based on some aspects of our reality you don't like them either?

Witch Doctor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_doctor) is just a name referring to people who are considered to be primitive healers employing medicine which is has not been scientifically proven by their culture and hasn't quite progressed as far as our own. In fact Witch Doctor is more a derogatory term towards the abilities and knowledge of a doctor. However due to the ignorance of many people in society it's attributed to the practice of black magic and people blame "Witch Doctors" for things like the Zombification of a person which has a base in reality too. Reanimated human corpses or so-called zombies have been poisoned by neurotoxin from the pufferfish: Tetrodotoxin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrodotoxin), and a powdered dissociative from the Datura (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datura). Don't confuse the origin of witch doctors or zombies with those found in popular fiction or in movies as having drawn from facts. They are pure fiction. The only thing linking them is the name and the superstitions behind witchcraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft), strictly speaking a witch doctor does not perform witchcraft but primitive medicine. However there are no real Witch Doctors, even the phrase is based in fiction since tribal healers may be primitive but they are by no means witches. The Witch Doctor class in Diablo III displays aspects from the Fictional side of the title "witch doctor" such as raising the dead, and controlling people's thoughts. I couldn't find evidence of ritual cutting like you referred to, so your emo reference is based on your imagination only.

The Shaman you're so fond of has a stronger base in reality, see shamanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaman). These religious leaders deal in the spirit realm. The shaman plays the role of healer in shamanic societies and gains knowledge and power via the Axis Mundi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_mundi).

You can go to the far reaches of the globe and find a Shaman in the real world. But you'd be hard pressed to find someone who truly believes themselves to be a witch doctor. Even the term Witch Doctor hasn't been around for more than 300 years and the closest thing to a witch doctor is a Nguni Sangoma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangoma) which is primarily considered a Shaman.

So in reality, a Witch Doctor is less realistic than a Shaman :) Does that mean you'd like a Shaman even less than a Witch Doctor because of that?

Mizantrop

11-08-2008, 00:54

You can't have a witch class because the male equivalent for a witch is a warlock....

CoQui

11-08-2008, 04:59

I dunno if I hate the WD as I haven't played it yet, BUT, I am sorta disappointed in it. I mean it's common that Blizzard crosses between franchises with characters and names, but I wish they would cook up some new stuff for once. The witch doctor looks so bizarre and sorta out of place in a way. I mean, if they replaced the necromancer with the witch doctor, there goes all hope of having any type of dark character. The necro and WD look like night and day in regards to art direction. Maybe I just think also that the WD can't hold his own alone in a fight although clearly that's not the case as we saw some of his spells on display. I dunno, I can't quite put my finger on it, but theres something about it.

Frostraven

13-08-2008, 20:09

You can't have a witch class because the male equivalent for a witch is a warlock....

No...

A witch can be male or female.
Females are most common because women were believed to have greater thirst for giving in to carnal pleasures and dealing with devils.

Why the heck modern man decided to call male witches for warlocks is beyond me -- because originally witch was fit for both genders.
Warlocks WERE devils -- witches DEALT WITH devils.

Just like dick and **** and *** used to be the proper name for a series of animals but was made unfit by illiteral idiots.

CaptainDingo

13-08-2008, 20:41

as far as i could understand from your post (a jumble of fragmented sentences and no clear segue between statements) you don't believe that you could like a character that's based in reality. Then because an assassin, paladin, barbarian, amazon, paladin, druid, warrior, rogue, and (abstractly) a sorcerer are all based on some aspects of our reality you don't like them either?

Oh snap, son!

Ammareddo_Fritter

14-08-2008, 19:54

Doesn't 'warlock' roughly mean 'deal/oath breaker?' And in old England & America, men were burned for being 'witches.'

stillman

14-08-2008, 22:27

But this is a different kind of witch for d3. He's a tribal. It's a whole different ballgame.

Mizantrop

16-08-2008, 19:28

No...

A witch can be male or female.
Females are most common because women were believed to have greater thirst for giving in to carnal pleasures and dealing with devils.

Why the heck modern man decided to call male witches for warlocks is beyond me -- because originally witch was fit for both genders.
Warlocks WERE devils -- witches DEALT WITH devils.

Just like dick and **** and *** used to be the proper name for a series of animals but was made unfit by illiteral idiots.

warlock or no warlock w/e. Point is that a witch class in D3 will raise such an outcry from the "wow-iz-evul" crowd that blizzard is very smart to avoid it. Atleast the WD looks original and somewhat new.

Malrenn

17-08-2008, 01:34

Frostraven

18-08-2008, 03:54

But this is a different kind of witch for d3. He's a tribal. It's a whole different ballgame.

Yes. He is a witch DOCTOR.

Formerly known as a "shaman".

The most agonizing bit of irony is that witch doctors is first mentioned in english literature as the description of ENGLISHMEN who claimed to cure diseases caused by the devil.
Quacks.

So basicly... Witch doctors were originally men in black suits selling mud.
Shamans on the other hand...

Doomek

18-08-2008, 07:33

looks really cool, it seems like a lot of the hxc d2 fans just want a d2 with better graphics remake, whats the fun in that? Its blizzard, they seem to all ways take the best things from there games and keep morphing into something better and better, imo the witchdoctor will have the hardcore pure necro onlys happy and any casual player.

or we could all...
you know chill the hell out since weve only seen a tiny bit of gameplay and a few skills XD

Chialex

23-08-2008, 07:06

The Wall of Zombies was not enough to sell you? :P

Yuri The Barbarian

25-08-2008, 20:34

I think it's a cool class idea, and I like the idea of being able to enchant your pets with different attacks. I like the bug swarm that eats people alive. Wall of zombies looks pretty cool.

I agree though, I don't like how hunched over he is. One think I hated about WOW was every Horde character was hunched over, and you end up feeling hunched over after playing one.

Hodl Pu

25-08-2008, 20:34

I think the only way to settle some arguments is to put out another video. However, that's only a 50% chance it will work ^^

more fans angry or more fans pleased.

and yeah, maybe some visual adjustments on the WD. But he's still a cool concept to have.

CosmicallyDrifting

26-08-2008, 04:33

I like the witch doctor, actually. It's unique. I have not seen another major rpg game that has a witch doctor. They all have those overrated necros though.

Plus, we've only seen what, 5 skills? out of possibly 100 for each class, who knows. The witch doctor allows for much more skill creativity than a necro.

Necro= dead things, bones, some disease or w/e. That's it.
Boring.

They could easily retool the witch doctor to not be so hunched over,that's a little art adjusment. They could also make it more gothic loooking. Another minor art adjustment.

And i think as we discover more skills the Witch Doctor has at it's disposal we will begin to see him/her in a different light.

Hodl Pu

27-08-2008, 10:33

Necro= dead things, bones, some disease or w/e. That's it.
Boring.

Blasphemy!
:surprise2:

no im joking, but i'm sure someone will get mad when they read that, haha. Necro isn't boring really to a lot of people, and the WD i'snt original itself really. BUT I'M NOT OPPOSING IT. I'm all for the the WD, aside from a couple of tweaks.

Mad Mantis

27-08-2008, 14:28

BUT I'M NOT OPPOSING IT. I'm all for the the WD, aside from a couple of tweaks.

At this point in time I think most people are not opposed to the WD and we would all like to see him in D3. I'm thinking that the couple of tweaks we would like to see will be what we will be discussing in the months to come. I'd just wish they showed some more skills. I'm fed up with the short list we have at the moment.

Galabab

27-08-2008, 21:50

WD sucks big time imo.
Its just a humble impression i had while watching the video.
There is no point to explain WHY i didnt like him All reasons will only be questioned. The fact is for me WD sucks so far.

Hige

28-08-2008, 01:42

If you hate him so much, don't play him. Blizzard probably doesn't really care about a little butthurt minority of players, and I doubt they'll go about wasting their time reading through your opinions, which basically state that Witch Doctors should look more like Necromancers and act more like them.

Besides, you can't base your opinion on a very short demo that only displays a few of his skills. Don't get your panties in a twist.

Zerosugar

28-08-2008, 13:32

I don't know if anyone is like me, but I just was really underwhelmed by the witch doctor.

First, I don't really want to play a class hunched over like an ape dragging his knuckles. But, secondly, he's just really underwhelming compared to the barbarian's completely over the top effects. I you cannot match that stunning performance with another class, you need to get rid of that class or rework it. Seriously, it was like seeing the Toronto Space Needle next to a barn silo.

Second, as a person that has played necromancer for several ladders in a row as my main, I hate the witch doctor. I loved my pets. I loved my UNDEAD pets. I realize they are lag central when you have 30. But, they could easily just make them bigger, and stronger and fewer. Give them multiple attacks on surrounding mobs as they level. Ditto the skeletal mages. Allow me one revive summon that turns into a horrible, massive beast with crushing blow and AE stun that lasts only 15 seconds or something.

I was really excited about the barbarian, then this waddling disaster came out and I was like... "are they kidding?". THIS is the new necromancer? Witch doctor sounds like a guy that failed the necromancer final exam.

I'm reasonably excited about the game, but reasonably disheartened about the loss of necromancers. That's my play style. I will try to adjust to something else, but just looking at the thing was irritating.

If anyone from Blizzard reads this by some chance, please reconsider.

Another mans trash is anothers treasure. I always hated the druid in D2 and the whole idea behind the class same with the assassin. Two classes i will never play. There will always be preferences when you have choices that's the way it works. Change isn't always bad. Maybe you will grow to love something new?.

I will never understand why people can't move on and embrace new things in sequels..people want rehashes which imho is boring.

teh_Thrasher

02-10-2008, 05:24

pure summoners are FTL. noobest build ever. "omg army do all my work for me cause i cant think for myself." all this crying over summons and crap like that is silly. necromancers summons sucked. u couldnt do anything in hell with them in any kind of decent time. waiting 10 minutes for 1 fight is what the design team is trying to remove!!! they want the game to be fast paced and aggresive. not sit back and eat a sandwich as ur minions do all the work

Witch Doctor will be a fun class. every class has its place and so will the WD

mordred

07-10-2008, 20:50

Totaly agreed...Stop whinning!!If you don't like the class don't play it!

Blizzatch

10-10-2008, 05:32

Naja

10-10-2008, 20:37

Are people still whining about the Necromancer not being in?

MooCQ

15-10-2008, 21:58

If you hate "him" so much [the male version of WD,] then fine, try [the female version.] You might even find out, you really love her!

GoDSamurai

20-10-2008, 23:57

Sylvanite

21-10-2008, 03:01

I agree witch doctor sounds stupid and look ugly. THey do sound in fact failed in necromancer final exam. I d rather see necromancer again in diablo3, with name Necromancer, not witch-doctor. I actually expected all the D2 characters would be remained as same on D3, I guess I am wrong. Anyway remove witch doctor blizzard i am warning ya! :xxx::banghead:

I really enjoyed this post.

Aside from that though, Witch Doctor is in. It looks cool, I'm glad Blizzard is trying new things instead of letting the game stagnate by catering to players who just want Diablo 2 again. I ONLY played Necromancers. I'm not kidding. Every kind. That said, I like the looks of the Doc. I like that he looks as though he will not have whole armies of summons, but rather be a summoner based on actual strategy. Buffing your pets with exposure to your other spells is genius too, what a great touch.

Jcakes

22-10-2008, 01:00

Mizantrop

24-10-2008, 05:23

My favorite class in D2 was the Necromancer. After playing all 3 classes in the Blizzcon demo I can say that the witch doctor was the most enjoyable one, for me.
True, the necro had a much better cool factor in lore and looks, but the WD more than compensate for that in his gameplay. Actually lore wise he was also the coolest imo between the 3. (even tho so little was shown) All I can say to the WD haters is trust the blues, have faith, you might be suprised.

Jedouard

06-11-2008, 05:28

When I first heard about the witch doctor, I was somewhat disappointed: the name alone just sounded less fierce than the character I assumed he'd be replacing, not to mention I had a few issues with some of his skills as shown in the original gameplay trailer. But, I decided to wait and see. That was until plague of toads!

I did not like that the witch doctor was not a master of the dead, but I could let that go. Sometimes change is good. I did like his version of curses and his fire bomb attack (although not necessarily the fact that it is a tangible skull). Furthermore, the explanation given for how the artists and designers came up with the latter was really cool. I wish I could say the same for wall of zombies, mongrels, locusts and now plague of toads, spider statue and fire bats. I really just don't like summoning a wall of dead people or some dead dogs when there is no dead stuff around (i.e., corpses) to summon them from. As for the other three, locusts, toads and spiders, just comparing them to the spells the wizard has makes them seem lame. Charged bolt versus toads!? One controls the elements the other has amphibians. (Where does he store these amphibians?) One has arcane mastery (i.e., incinerate) the other has fiery bats. One has nova, the other has spiders. You get the idea. No matter their actual in-game strength, the witch doctor's skills just seem conceptually weak in comparison to the wizards.

I am not asking to have a necromancer again; I understand that an army might be out of place in this game. (I do not agree, however, that it was a mindless task to control that army. It was pretty mindless once you were level 90+ with all the perfect aura and +skill gear, but then whose character wasn't under those circumstance?) Such an army might not fit the high-strategy, face-paced game Blizzard seems to be going for just because of its sheer unmanageability. (There would have to be bots to place the burden of strategizing on the summons, not the player) However, if we are going to have minions, please let us have a source for their summoning (golems = elements, skeles = dead). And, if we are going to have any spells at all, please make them equally epic across all the character classes... in fact just make them all incredibly epic. Don't sacrifice coolness to thematic, yet stupid looking skills.

Lastly, again, I am not looking for a necro. I am cool with what the witch doctor write up called a short-ranged, up close, DOT class with summoned tanks--just don't make him conceptually suck. The witch doctor's story, the themed skills to go with that story and the way the skills look and function all need to be awesome... par with master-of-the-dead awesome even if he is not a master of the dead.

For Christ's sake get rid of the damn toads! They are so stupid looking!

Jedouard

06-11-2008, 05:49

P.S. It is pretty clear that the change from a necro to a witch doctor was because of the fast-paced strategy game Blizzard is going for. Of the three characters we have seen so far, two have pretty much been preserved since the very first game The D1-D2-D3 order goes warrior-barbarian-barbarian and sorcerer-sorceress-wizard. Sure the barbarian added a lot to the warrior and the wizard will have arcane, but there has not been so drastic a change as necro to witchdoctor. It is for this reason (i.e., better fitting the strategic game) that I am okay with them making drastic changes to the summoning archetype.

On the other hand, the wizard's upper-level conjuring skills still have meteor and hydra--point being, they ought not to have done this if they were trying to preserve conceptually thematic yet strategically powerful, cool skills like they said. If the witch doctor is the class in charge of fire, then, even though I like neither meteor nor hydra, either give him those spells or, if they have no place in the thematic/strategic game, remove them. If you are going to remove the necro from the game because he doesn't strategically AND thematically fit, fair enough, but don't give us this as an excuse if you don't preserve the same etiquette for wizards.

That said, this is all the more reason to believe that the changing out of the necro was strategic, not thematic.

Claymenza

06-11-2008, 18:14

I don't know if anyone is like me, but I just was really underwhelmed by the witch doctor.

First, I don't really want to play a class hunched over like an ape dragging his knuckles. But, secondly, he's just really underwhelming compared to the barbarian's completely over the top effects. I you cannot match that stunning performance with another class, you need to get rid of that class or rework it. Seriously, it was like seeing the Toronto Space Needle next to a barn silo.

Second, as a person that has played necromancer for several ladders in a row as my main, I hate the witch doctor. I loved my pets. I loved my UNDEAD pets. I realize they are lag central when you have 30. But, they could easily just make them bigger, and stronger and fewer. Give them multiple attacks on surrounding mobs as they level. Ditto the skeletal mages. Allow me one revive summon that turns into a horrible, massive beast with crushing blow and AE stun that lasts only 15 seconds or something.

I was really excited about the barbarian, then this waddling disaster came out and I was like... "are they kidding?". THIS is the new necromancer? Witch doctor sounds like a guy that failed the necromancer final exam.

I'm reasonably excited about the game, but reasonably disheartened about the loss of necromancers. That's my play style. I will try to adjust to something else, but just looking at the thing was irritating.

If anyone from Blizzard reads this by some chance, please reconsider.

:jig: Wow, that's awesome how you worded that but it's the harsh reality. The Witch Doctor (the name sucks) looks underwhelming compared to the barbarian and wizard. That's just the nature of the character though, because the necromancer was underwhelming compared to the barbariand and sorceress.

But I do get where you're coming from: This class seems like it's meant to be even weaker than the necromancer. Blizzard believe that they can balance him well, but it seems like a chore to play this class. He doesn't even look intimidating so they better introduce some bigger summons.

They just wanted to have a voodoo class. At least the necromancer had some badass armor. This dude has leafs on his hat :alright:

Claymenza

06-11-2008, 18:19

I love how blizzard said they brought back the barbarian because he needed to be perfected/improved. He animates like high end action games and has the moves of Maximus.

Yet their "improvement" over the necromancer turned out like this.

Frostraven

06-11-2008, 19:06

stillman

07-11-2008, 00:14

This thread just won't go away...probably because the people have a point. I kind of dislike the WD too, mainly because of his over-the-top contorted looks. You can tell the artists were pressured/forced to make him more and more hunched over and wacky until he no longer looks like anything recognizable. The WD cries out for attention with his visually loud distorted looks.

Now the barb is over-the-top too, but in a very nice way that makes him awesome to behold.

I can't agree that the necro was "perfect". In orignal release, and for the longest time thereafter, the necro was the weakest chr to play. Also, his armor looks like a children's Halloween costume. I fear the WD will fill the same role of being the chr you pick if you purposely want to gimp yourself.

Also, have you guys seen the progressive armor pictures for the WD? For the one labelled "medium armor", I can tell you that there IS NO armor. His "armor" is basically some wooden bracers around his wrists.

Leugi

07-11-2008, 00:42

Actually, based on the progressive armor things, I do believe armors won't be simply like costumes stillman, they do look great and, well, 'armor-like', you know?

And combined with some nice masks and other items the WD can look even more intimidating than the Necro.

Apocalypse

07-11-2008, 15:01

295 posts already in the thread and now i jump in to say how much i like the WD so far. i cant say i really know that much about him but so far what i have seen i like

Akimbo

07-11-2008, 15:22

WD will be kind of cool I think. Isn't the WD a WoW class though? -_-

Mad Mantis

07-11-2008, 17:11

For the one labelled "medium armor", I can tell you that there IS NO armor. His "armor" is basically some wooden bracers around his wrists.

Few of the shown armors of the WD have any form of actual armor. I'm a bit disappointed by that. I didn't expect a full plate look, but still something that looks like it actually gives armor would be preferable than some leaves and cloth that gives magic protection.

Damnatorius

09-11-2008, 08:37

The WD seems more like a druid than a necro to me, and is likely to be my first character. I love him conceptially.

In the name of Zod

09-11-2008, 13:07

They merged the druid and the necro to make way for new characters without having 10+ characters to choose from. Its rather obvious.

Frostraven

10-11-2008, 01:30

They merged the druid and the necro to make way for new characters without having 10+ characters to choose from. Its rather obvious.

Oooh..! And sorceress and paladin and amazon (passive skills) => Wizard

And barbarian and barbarian and barbarian (barbarian skills) => Barbarian

Druid and necromancer and assassin (thrown things) => British Quack Potion Salesman aka Witch Doctor

Which leaves assassin + amazon (bow skills) => Unknown class

Schpwuette

12-11-2008, 18:17

They merged the druid and the necro to make way for new characters without having 10+ characters to choose from. Its rather obvious.

What.

Necro was: Summon-based support-caster (bone prison/wall, curses). With, if heavily specialised, pure caster possiblities.

Druid was: Summon-supported strong/fast-melee/spellcaster. With auras, and, if heavily specialised, timer spells (fire).

Tell me: how can you possibly make a character who is not a merger of these two classes?
Oh, except for bow-user, but we all know there's going to be one of those anyway.

teh_Thrasher

13-11-2008, 06:35

And barbarian and barbarian and barbarian (barbarian skills) => Barbarian

uh thats quite the merger...:thumbsup:

WD is fine as is... necro sucked. wd is much more balanced for dmg dealing and not just auto pilot summons:yes:

i wanna see the other 2 classes :spy:

xchrisbobisx

21-11-2008, 23:33

The witch doctor all in all is a "uncool class". witch doctor and shaman. You think of crazy bushmen with big looped earrings and liprings, in straw kilts, chicken bones, turtle shells, voodoo masks dancing around a fire chanting things. Very primative. Compared on a coolness level the witch doctor is quite inferior to the cold, silent gothic necromancer.

But being so primative, ugly and lame. Im sure their going to be OPed. I can already see witch doctors AOE grinding with relative ease.

bjsdtl

22-11-2008, 11:12

im one of the 2 people that will be rolling a witch doctor right off the bat. he seems pretty cool

Naja

22-11-2008, 22:06

The witch doctor all in all is a "uncool class". witch doctor and shaman. You think of crazy bushmen with big looped earrings and liprings, in straw kilts, chicken bones, turtle shells, voodoo masks dancing around a fire chanting things. Very primative. Compared on a coolness level the witch doctor is quite inferior to the cold, silent gothic necromancer.

Funny, the Barbarian looks sort of "primitive" to me, and he seems pretty cool. Or is that just because he's white, rather than a "bushman"? :whistling:

I certainly will make the WD my first pick as well. I think it's time we abandon the gothic caricatures of the past and innovate with something new.

CBGB

27-11-2008, 20:28

I certainly will make the WD my first pick as well. I think it's time we abandon the gothic caricatures of the past and innovate with something new.

New, improved gameplay is great.

But 'witch doctor' fits the genre about as well as Aquaman. Aquaman is better, actually. He's also new and fresh, he's less primitive than the barbarian, and he comes with a water-resistant coating.

Blizzard is applying the same creativity to monsters. The act finales will now feature five bosses. See if you can spot the new, innovative one:

Astaroth
Beelzebub
Mephistopheles
Barbatos
Tweety Bird

Smash

27-11-2008, 21:53

They merged the druid and the necro to make way for new characters without having 10+ characters to choose from. Its rather obvious.

I heard that necro found out about this merge and ran away before process could start so druid was merged with nearest tree. Now you know why all this leaves come from.

Naja

28-11-2008, 10:57

People just like to keep b*tching about pointless things, I guess.

CBGB

30-11-2008, 05:42

Nah, people just like to share their thoughts. Since this thread is called "I hate the witch doctor," it's a good place for the above opinions.

I was curious how other D3 players felt. Some like the witch doctor, and there are plenty of threads about that in this same forum. I've enjoyed reading them and feel no need to tell players there they are 'wrong' for having an opinion that differs from mine.

But I also found someone who summed up my view nicely, and I'm glad I did:
This is supposed to be GOTHIC fantasy! This means dark, grim and dense style. Necromancer is THE most gothic class of all and my favorite... Pale, thin, smart, antisocial, EMO and GOTHIC

If you like the witch doctor, no worries. You'll find many like minds in the other threads for this forum.

The Dark Wonderer

19-01-2009, 05:41

Sutekj

19-01-2009, 09:59

Wow, what a lot of moaners...

Necromancer was my favourite class in Diablo 2 too. And I can see myself liking the witchdoctor just as much as I liked the necromancer. Witchdoctor will have the same kind of play style that the old necromancer had.

I think he looks cool. I like the fact that it is an hunched over quack that makes shamanic sounds when he summons pets or casts firebombs. I love those disgusting pets - And you can set the on fire! That is awesome no matter how you look at it.

Further more, the one thing that annoyed me the most about the necromancer is that I had to find corpses before I could start summoning. Witchdoctor doesn't have that problem.

If you still really hate this class, there will be four other for you to chose from. Also, Bashiok said that the witchdoctor isn't a replacement of the necromancer. The incorporation of the witchdoctor doesn't mean that there cannot be a necromancer as well. Maybe, if you whine enough, they put a necromancer in an expansion.

Doctor Salvador

19-01-2009, 18:19

First off the necromancer just goes with diablo.. a witch docter? i mean come on..your replacing the undead ruler of skeletal mayham with a monkey guy with dogs? shame on you for destroying our hope blizzard.

The Witch Doctor is actually much 'darker' than the necromancer, IMO. The Necromancer was very polite, European, very much a normal person, and he was a well-known character in Sanctuary. Everybody's heard of the necro.

The Witch Doctor, on the other hand, is unknown, mysterious, practices a form of magic that most men can't fathom the origins of. He is hunched over, disturbed . . . and he's freaking covered in bones just like the Necro was.

From the D3 official website:
"As if these assaults were not enough, the witch doctor also had at his command the ability to summon undead creatures from the netherworld to rend the flesh from his enemy's body."

Laycast

19-01-2009, 18:40

First off the necromancer just goes with diablo.. a witch docter? i mean come on..your replacing the undead ruler of skeletal mayham with a monkey guy with dogs? shame on you for destroying our hope blizzard.

These guys are trolls dude...they're 30 year olds sitting in their dorrito stained underwear getting even fatter trying to take their pathetic lives out on some diablo forums. Let them "try" to be more mature than you, they're trying to compensate for what's been lost in their early years. Which wasn't their virginity... SNAP!

Doctor Salvador

19-01-2009, 20:00

These guys are trolls dude...they're 30 year olds sitting in their dorrito stained underwear getting even fatter trying to take their pathetic lives out on some diablo forums. Let them "try" to be more mature than you, they're trying to compensate for what's been lost in their early years. Which wasn't their virginity... SNAP!

You just said that in the 'I Hate D3?' thread, didn't you?

Why do you hate the Witch Doctor?

sirBeReN

19-01-2009, 22:39

I like the Witch doctor as much as the Druid in D2. But he can never be the uberness Necromancer was... I will definitelly be waiting for a good expansion. Necromancers are a MUST!

AtomicJ

22-01-2009, 21:24

At first I wasn't too impressed with the WD either. I didn't necessarily dislike him, I was just more indifferent toward him. The more I see of him, however, the more he grows on me.

In the gameplay videos, his curse and firebomb spells really gave me a sense of impact and oomf. Personally, I like his effects. I also like his character design. It's interesting to me that Blizzard isn't going to go with tired archetypes for all the classes (though I'm glad they stick to at least some). I really like his soul harvest and confuse spells, too. The only complaint I have is that I'm just not that interested in the zombie wall. I'm a player who likes summons, so I would prefer that he summon mobile, individual zombies. But that's just me. In the end, he probably won't be my first choice (I'm a Barb player :smug:), but I'll definitely look forward to trying him out and seeing how he develops.

Also, I hope Blizzard goes with the WD and the Necro (in an expansion). The more the merrier, IMO. And I think all you Necro fans don't need to worry. Blizzard will most likely bring him back. He was just too popular in D2, they'd have to be crazy not to have him return (improved!).

creiij

22-01-2009, 22:50

And I love him!

Grug

23-01-2009, 05:24

Woot! Go Witch Doctor! Completely agree with AtomicJ. I was neutral, but now I think he's awesome. I also definitely prefer expendable pets. Besides, how could the necromancer raise skeletons? Corpses don't stick around, nor to they stay in one piece! It's obvious Blizz will put him in an expansion to stop the Fanwank. I actually will enjoy waiting, because it gives Blizz time to make him more unique and interesting, instead of "the guy with skeletons".

paulblasi4

23-01-2009, 07:13

I posted a previous thread about how i prefer the Necro, but thinking about it further I simply have a problem with the Witch Doctor. It just doesn't feel right... like it doesn't place into a Diablo game... maybe it will play well, but it still doesn't feel like a Diablo class I'd want to spend time on.
Barbarian!! Necromancer! Wizard!! .... Witch...:coffee: ... doctor...

Rash

23-01-2009, 10:26

Rashiminos

23-01-2009, 13:35

Something I haven't quite noticed until now...

Doctor Salvador

23-01-2009, 22:10

I dont like him, but its ok. You can't like all chars, and i was always the direct person. Either play a fighter (Paladin) oder the magic guy (sorc). Everything in between is not my style.

So its hard to me to judge this guy, but i think its reasonable to have him around, he will have its fans... just like the Druid in D2.

I LoL'ed when you said that you 'only play a fighter or a magic wielder' yet you listed the Paladin as the fighter, while he is in fact a support char, and the Barbarian is the fighter.

And to those who don't believe the Doctor fits in with Diablo, look at the Witch Doctor page, it lists his homeland, which coincidentally lies in Sanctuary, and his heritage, which is Diablo lore. They didn't do anything new except put the char in the game. The Witch Doctor's fine in the game, he's a dark mysterious character, which is what Diablo's all about.

Flux

24-01-2009, 13:22

Am I the only one who never thought the D2 necromancer was cool? I'm not talking about the actual gameplay, just the image of the character, which is what almost everyone criticizing the WD in this thread is concentrating on. (IMHO, the WD's gameplay will determine 99% of his/her popularity in the final game, when eruptions like this thread are long forgotten).

I liked the idea of the brooding, grave-lurking mage, but the execution was just some skinny white guy with a billy idol mullet. (Anyone old enough to remember the arguments when we got the first necro screenshots and players saw that he had white hair?) Honestly, he's basically Emo, eh?
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a77/internetdudes/EmoKid.jpg

Okay, maybe a bit more Goth (http://www.freakingnews.com/Goth-Pictures---1436.asp), and sure, there are hot goth girls (http://images.google.com/images?q=goth+girls&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2) (plus all the makeup and girdles and bustiers makes it easier for ugly girls to pass) but that's only a short step up on the "less likely to get your *** kicked for your lunch money" ladder.
http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/goth.jpg

Neither case really screams "diablo hero" to me, with the possible exception of goth girls, who can pass for the sorceress char in most RPGs.

Mizantrop

24-01-2009, 15:09

I disgree with Flux on this issue. I think some of the Necro's popularity is the result of his dark and brooding looks. In that way he looks more like Geralt (http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Geralt_of_Rivia) than some Goth/Emo kid:

http://epi87.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/geralt.png?w=425&h=475
You can see some similarities like the spike, long hair and leather, but it's clearly not your average unhappy teen.

That being said, I think most of the class popularity comes from it's original game play. I think no other RPG game before D2 let you play a character like the necro. You had mass summons, dps and debuffs. I think Jay Wilson is pretty much on the spot when he says the Necro is a complete class (except balance and bugs). What we can hope for is that the WD be complete just like the Necro was when D3 ships but in it's own original and new way.

Bladewind

24-01-2009, 16:27

If the nec is not in on this one, at least let him be in the xpac...

AtomicJ

24-01-2009, 20:47

I'm in some agreement with Flux. I don't mind his paleness and white hair, but I wasn't a fan of the Necro's clothing choices. I seem to remember when wearing some armor combinations he had light red pants?!?! C'mon, that's pretty bad. I thought his shoulder pads didn't look good, either. And no cloaks? I think his colors should have been much darker (purples, blacks, etc), and he should've had big cloaks/capes for most of his armor combos. I also think he should've had cooler helms, I don't remember being very impressed with his choices. I wouldn't mind if they made him resemble the evil mages from D1 a little more. They looked pretty cool, IIRC.

Otherwise? Pretty cool character.

ktchong

24-01-2009, 21:35

Rename the class. Drop the "Witch Doctor". "Witch Doctor" is a silly name for a class.

Just call it "Shaman".

raveharu

24-01-2009, 21:45

Rename the class. Drop the "Witch Doctor". "Witch Doctor" is a silly name for a class.

Just call it "Shaman".

:disagree:

Shaman is too common and WoW-ish.

Doctor Salvador

24-01-2009, 23:43

ktchong

25-01-2009, 03:33

:disagree:

Shaman is too common and WoW-ish.
I don't play WoW (or any MMO) so I didn't know Shaman was a class in WoW.

Anyhow, some classes are staples in fantasy role-playing games. Like Barbarian, Paladin, Wizard, Ranger, Druid, and (of course) Shaman. It's pointless to give some silly name to a standard class just to be different.

Witch Doctor is a rather silly name for the Shaman class.

AxlStrife

25-01-2009, 03:46

Witch Doctor is a perfectly fine name for the class. I believe that the name "Shaman" wasn't used as to distance itself from the Druid class from D2, as Druid and Shaman are very similar in functionality.

EDIT: First post in about 6 months. and back on BNet.

Mad Mantis

25-01-2009, 11:38

Shaman makes me think of stoners not voodoo priests.

Doctrinaire

27-01-2009, 13:59

Anyhow, some classes are staples in fantasy role-playing games. Like Barbarian, Paladin, Wizard, Ranger, Druid, and (of course) Shaman. It's pointless to give some silly name to a standard class just to be different.

Diablo III's Witch Doctor has a heavy African/Voodoo theme. In pop culture, shamans tend to be associated with traditional Native American religions, whereas the witch doctor is practically synonymous with Voodoo. Considering that, it should be obvious why the class is called Witch Doctor and not Shaman.

Oh, and it's worth mentioning that of all the classes you mentioned, Shaman is the only one that has never been a base DnD class. It only gets tossed around in a lot of RPG's because its a cool word, not because a solid archetype has been attached to it. WoW's Shaman and EQ's Shaman are very different, but if you wanted to find some common link between them it would be their ability to heal and buff. Does the Witch Doctor do either? No, so why then should it be called the Shaman? I don't think you've actually thought the argument you are making through.

creiij

28-01-2009, 20:54

My eyes were drawn to the witch doctor right away, never been so much for melee. And after the Wizard thingy I still want to play the witch doctor =)

raveharu

28-01-2009, 22:51

Witch Doctor is a rather silly name for the Shaman class.

WD =/= shaman

Zarniwoop

07-02-2009, 02:45

I've accepted there will be no necromancer in D3. There won't. Don't tell me how they said the door was still open. You don't cross over that strongly on a class.

I just hope it's done well and he doesn't make me retch.

Agre

08-02-2009, 11:04

I can't wait to play a Witch Doctor. It's like something from a nightmare. You know what a Barbarian does, and has done. He chops crap in half. Same goes for a Necromancer. Summons dead guys. But a Witch Doctor...

Yeah you guys enjoy your run of the mill I WHACK MONSTARS RARR barbarian, and I'll try something thats not a dialtone.

teh_Thrasher

08-02-2009, 19:43

"I WHACK MONSTARS RARR"

DIALTONE!!!! say whaaaaaaat! barbarian is a staple class of brutal ownage and dismemberment! ill show u dialtone tree hugger!

*goes hostile* oh wait ya cant in d3 FAILLLLLL.

lol :P

ThomasJ

08-02-2009, 23:26

Hey to each their own but I think the Witch Doctor looks good so far. I can't wait to play the class :)

Zor Prime

10-02-2009, 00:03

Let's give them a chance, shall we? I could pick 4 skill from most of the D2 classes to focus on and make them seem horrible. Blizzard's preview of the Barbarian and Wizard focus on skills very similar to skills from D2, making them seem more familiar. Until we see more of the remaining skills, lets not be so quick to judge?

Who knows, in the end the very things people are complaining about may end up being vital aspects to a strong build

Psyco

17-02-2009, 16:54

i also dont like the WD that much....he is new and is spell "look" nice....but it still the same old spell that have new graphic to them...

wall of zombie=firewall
firebomb=fireblast
voodoo fear thing=Howl
confuse=mind blast
ect...etc..

i admit the pet that are used as weapon and not them bashing everything is new....but id rather have my own personal army which was unique of D2 and a really unique class that no other Diablo-like as been able to make so far

the WD seem to be like the Druid in D2 with no real pure role...i dont say i wont play him...or that he will suck...i just think he is so far the most unoriginal new class in the game....caster mixed with pet mixed with crowd control...i really hope the new class are gonna be a bit more original then this one...the wiz and barb got a revamp and the barb now look just incradible

AtomicJ

17-02-2009, 19:49

Call me simplistic, but I like the WD simply for aesthetic reasons, for me it's not as much about what he adds gameplay-wise. He's not a traditional class common to fantasy games, that's for sure, and usually I don't like fringe characters from out of left field like this, but for some reason the WD grew on me. He's just different from what I'm used to, so that makes me a little curious about him. He won't be my favorite, though. That may be reserved for the male Barb and male Wiz.:cloud9:

Blizzard still has a lot to do with him, as right now he only has 11 skills. Maybe they will add some skills to him that make him more interesting gameplay-wise to all you WD haters. If you guys still don't like him, then I guess it just wasn't meant to be. I won't begrudge you your opinions (there seems to be a lot of that going on in this forum), though. But with 5 classes, you're bound to not be blown away by every single class. Though it hasn't happened yet, I'm pretty much counting on be disinterested in one of the two unrevealed classes. Because I expect it, I won't get too worked up over it when it happens.:thumbup:

FreshMeat

29-04-2009, 17:19

It makes sense to replace necro with witchdoctor because most everyone hates the WD and really loved the necro.

Also, it makes sense as now that DII is very old, more people that still play play Necros for their odd, eternal, non repetitive style and wide variety of crowd controlling variables.

It makes sense to chuck them as they are so loved by intelligent people who still play the game once in a while. Barbs and Zons are favorites of the hack/dupe/ebay bought kiddies age ranged 9-15. It is obvious both are going to be back. This all makes me really happy.

Also: notice the amount of people viewing this vs the other ones. 1 in barb 1 in here, 17 in wizard.

Telling sign? Yes, we need a barb, its just the way that goes, he provides carnal meat attacking fun. Wizard apparently is the savior of the game however.

loesr

29-04-2009, 18:02

Good topic. This is one of those love or hate characters. There will be no middle ground.

IMO the WD is like a terrible replacement for the Necro, who, as I have posted before, is the single most important character type in the lore. For the uninitiated, read the books. All the way back to Rathma.

Don't get me wrong, we need the summoner\caster type, but not this one. Artists have a way of valuing novelty over quality.

Blizzard paraphrased logic:
Here we have a Necro that works (very well), in the new game, let's change it up, keep it fresh. I know, let's pick a psuedo-sociological, ethic stereotype from the real world. Then, let's really perpetuate the stereotype by adding appropriate clothing, voodoo masks, and skills that involve chucking frogs. FROGS. It borders on the offensive. Classes should be about skills and lore-centric archetypes, not specific stereotypes from our world, not to mention fairly questionable ones.

Krugar

29-04-2009, 20:49

I like the WD. So we have a problem. Some people like it, others don't. Do you like the Druid in D2? I can't stand it myself. And definitely the Sorceress is one of those characters in D2 I find terribly boring where others swear by it. I love the barb and the necro, but many don't agree.

How exactly do you propose to solve this problem? Your way? My way? Or do you actually believe it is possible to create something that doesn't fall into firmly established archetypes without this necessarily meeting the disapproval of some?

Blizzard paraphrased logic: [...]

Careful... that's dangerous grounds. Besides, do not get into speculation if you are trying to use it to further your arguments. It's cheating.

loesr

29-04-2009, 21:47

Point taken, these are dangerous grounds. But by the same token, that is my point. These are dangerous grounds - why would they make such a targeted character? Also agreed, remove the paraphrase, and work only with the given WD as evidence:

1. Blizzard takes huge risks in creating such a specific and very derived character, which at best has the potential as a niche crowd pleaser. A more generic character type has a better chance of appealing to a far wider audience. Kudos to the risk taking, don't get me wrong, but why take unnecessary ones?

2. Ask yourself - Are characters designed to provide a specific type of role playing to a specific target audience (specifying or even limiting your possibilities), or are they designed to provide a different type of play, allowing a different backdrop for role playing, with a degree of customization to the role you play (simply providing a platform for open possibilities, at the most setting a category).

3. Objective - Ever wonder why every fantasy RPG game has the archetypal warrior, mage, and hunter? Because it works. History in board, card, and electronic RPGs should be enough.
Subjective (admittedly) - Most fantasy lore stems from the typical Tolkien fare, which, love it or leave it, is the status quo. I appreciate the need to innovate, but not so much that it begins to lose artistic direction. If you tell someone you play D&D, do they think of the Wild Wild West? Be honest, please.

Also, be careful on such grounds, as equally a given poster may have reason to be offended... ;) Just keeping it light, I meant no daggers.

Krugar

29-04-2009, 22:39

1. Blizzard takes huge risks in creating such a specific and very derived character, which at best has the potential as a niche crowd pleaser. A more generic character type has a better chance of appealing to a far wider audience. Kudos to the risk taking, don't get me wrong, but why take unnecessary ones?

We are still 2 characters away from the 5 that will make the final game. So there is no telling what other archetypes besides the barbarian and the Wizard are going to be brought in. My guess is just one more, a ranged-attack based class. The other class will most probably be a second melee oriented class. Otherwise the game would look strange with just one melee oriented class.

The necro itself was a very non archetypal type in D2. That didn't seem to be a problem then. (Although I could almost bet I remember loud voices against it back then).

I'm not convinced people will diminish the game because they don't like the WD. I'm hard pressed to believe there is a risk element in here.

2. Ask yourself - Are characters designed to provide a specific type of role playing to a specific target audience (specifying or even limiting your possibilities), or are they designed to provide a different type of play, allowing a different backdrop for role playing, with a degree of customization to the role you play (simply providing a platform for open possibilities, at the most setting a category).

But you have no way so far of providing evidence this won't be the case with the WD. We are still missing 80%(?) of the skills, we have no way yet of matching the WD against the flow of the game, we have no information whatsoever on the WD equipment, we have no idea how this character will progress through the game...

3. Objective - Ever wonder why every fantasy RPG game has the archetypal warrior, mage, and hunter? Because it works. History in board, card, and electronic RPGs should be enough.

But the announced classes already fill in 2 well known class-types. And there's still 2 more unannounced we are waiting for. Exactly how many archetypes do you feel there are? And would you like them all to be included making of Diablo a AD&D clone?

I appreciate the need to innovate, but not so much that it begins to lose artistic direction. If you tell someone you play D&D, do they think of the Wild Wild West? Be honest, please.

We can agree the WD current imagery doesn't seem to fit somehow. It seems the character is lacking charisma for a representative number of players. I myself don't see this so clearly. As I said I actually like the character. The problem is that this is a highly subjective as you agree. So how can this be solved without going hostile to some group of players that will always be against something?

My opinion is a tad bit rude. And it can be resumed to this: the WD is a novelty. And like most novelties, it will take time to get used to. But much like the necro, novelties have a bigger potential to become one of the most loved features on the game.

The thing is that I don't even feel there is a need for a "Save the WD!" petition. There's actually a large group of players who like this character already. And this creates a problem to anyone complaining about it.

loesr

29-04-2009, 23:42

First of all, very well argued! It's nice to really work the issue at hand, rather than fend off defensive rhetoric typical of some forums.

As for archetypes, even in most religious and mythological forms, you will find the standard three:the magic\divine, the very strong, and the very cunning\swift\agile characters. These types of characters have been stories for thousands of years - you would be hard pressed refuting ancient and modern mythologies, and heroes of every age. But that's really for history buffs.

As with all current discussions related to DIII, we don't have the full release of the game to submit as evidence, and therefore it's a given that arguments will not have a complete data set from which to draw a conclusion. All we have to go on is the progress so far, with respect to the knowledge that Blizzard will continue to develop ( and add to the WD's skill tree, in this case).

I suppose some of the same "limiting" arguments could have been made on the Necro, but personally, I find the gritty, gothic form of the Necro more fitting to the Diablo lore. That said, just because the WD is in the game, doesn't mean one has to play as the WD.

To give you the requested solution, I think this post gives Blizzard three pieces of data.

1. "The WD current imagery doesn't seem to fit" - well spoken

2. Deviation for the sake of novelty has polarized the opinions of a fan base.

3. As that fan base is now effectively polarized, it would be wise to include the opinions of the anti-WD crowd into the remaining character choices.

LucianDK

25-05-2009, 19:47

I am amused by all the ranting here. I personally find the Witch Doctor a pleasing new addition to the roster of diablo classes and a worthy improvement over the Necromancer.

The WD seems to be a more strategical spellcaster with curselike abilities in all 3 trees and not just having one tree devoted explicitly to it. Plus unique spells such as Skull of Doom with the lobbed skull grenade, or mass confusion to turn an enemy's strenght against themselves.

While I like spellcasters, ive always gravitated towards more subtle casters, relying more on finese and skill, than brute force direct damage spells.

Dont fear change so much!

FreshMeat

25-05-2009, 20:37

If you were married to Heidi Klum and someone replaced it with an 80 year old drag queen, you'd be pissed right?

that's the closest I can get to dropping necro (major sucess, well loved, huge fanbase) to Witchdoctor (1000's of threads devoted to how stupid it is and makes the game) (not to knock 80 year old drag queens?)

See a P A T T E R N ??????????????

eh?

wd = suck

Blizzard released info on the Fallen that it would be the most silly of all the monsters, but Blizz wants DIII to be much more serious and in depth.

uh...... thanks for the serious looking wdoctor.

:thumbup:

FreshMeat

01-06-2009, 23:37

the only medic character is a prayer/holy bolt pally. It is a bit awkward.

It makes sense what your are saying.

Maybe there will be pigs you can lacerate and spew blood all over the place, or like chickens, you could find them and cut their heads off. Or buy some drugs and mumble on the ground for a few hours.

effective tools of death..............

Mad Mantis

03-06-2009, 18:49

FreshMeat and raveharu, I'm going to say this once and in public. Don't start flame wars. If you disagree with another posts report it. It will be handled. Personal insults aren't needed. The next one to make a personal attack gets a ban.

FreshMeat

04-06-2009, 04:03

this is about hating the wd. Can't i make comments about hating the wdoctor? to come in here and defend WD and wig on people is unpleasant. this is a hate thread. I like to revel in it's filfth. let us be. I wont talk about hating raveharu though if that makes you pleased.

Mad Mantis

04-06-2009, 19:59

Talk about the WD all you want. Using the WD as a means of insulting other posters or posting outright flames is not allowed.

Fegon

12-06-2009, 23:07

If Blizzard removed the WD that wouldnt mean that the new character to replace him in D3 would be the Necro, you could just as well hate on the Barb or the Wiz, (Obvius answer; but the Wd got summons and so on). Doesnt mean anything.

lunarleif

14-06-2009, 05:51

All right, the witch doctor looks a bit, :crazyeyes: lame. However, people must understand that the barbarian was the first class and a returning class so Blizzard understands the nature of the character. Blizzard also has had more time to work on the barbarian in most likely hood since they have had more time and or they wanted to make a character really well done merely to represent the whole game. Another thing that others have said is that we are judging only on partial information. The iterative process, however demands input and as such, instead of criticizing, you might wish to inform Blizzard of what you want so as tho improve the witch doctor :scratchchin:. There is a definite lament over the loss of the necromancer, he was the only character I liked playing and the only character that actually held my interest long enough to be the game with, or at least in a partial sense. I believe the reason that Blizzard is taking him out is that they are showing independence of the common people since they are professionals and hopefully know what they are doing, we wouldn't really care this much to discuss all of this unless they actually made good games, and that they may put him in an expansion or wait until the very end when the game releases to state that he's in the game to spark interest.

Airazor

14-06-2009, 07:01

WD is alright in my opinion, it's just that the Necro is so much superior it doesn't matter.

wishforskillz

14-06-2009, 16:31

name removed for safety reasons.
Like I said, that's not happening in here. What is happening in here is, "WTFZ I WANT A NECRO".

Its a late quote but I have to.

I'm sorry sir, but you are right, and the rest of us are wrong. Please excuse humanity and it's idiocracy while you go find the cure for cancer. Because that cure for cancer will work for everyone, because everyone is the same and has the same opinion on what works and what doesn't.

Once again, I apologize for any stupidity that was shown here from an opinion, because our opinions are wrong.

Now onto my opinion of the witch doctor. It looks like it could be a different necro build, like a daggermancer or mojomancer. It may not be the most powerful, but it will have its nitch and it will kill things much faster than any other class there. Time will tell, and only that will truly tell. Hey, maybe the Barb turns out to be a 98lb weakling. Maybe the WD is the new hammerdin. I hope not, hammerdins are a dime a dozen and their equipment is thousands of dollars, but hey.

hubb

14-06-2009, 18:25

How in God's name can you say ANYTHING about the WD from a couple of minutes of pre-alpha gameplay. You don't know ****.

GunPowderScarrab

14-06-2009, 20:10

me to. i fully agree. diablo is loosing it's hardcore sweet gothic taste. i don't like his wierd-*** hunched back either. if this is replacing the necromancer, diablo 3 is loosing it's umph. better get some gothi demon guy before d111=wow.

Jedouard

14-06-2009, 21:48

raveharu

14-06-2009, 23:35

I am not comparing the WD in any way to the D2 Necro, at least not in any way different than I am to any other D2 character. To me, the WD suffers from one major flaw: he/she is not epic on any scale. The D3 Barb and Wizard have epic skills... truly epic. The Barb appears to break the sound barrier at times; the Wizard can slow time. These skills are on the order of Greek Gods. (Most of the D2 characters at least had some epic spells at well.) The WD doesn't match this.

This could be fixed with something as easy as a change in the animation. Rather than throwing frog, locusts, or skulls, call them forth on a grander, diabolic scale. There, we move from stupid spell to an epic plague of biblical proportions.

Other than that, I am fine with the concept behind his design, i.e., someone who controls stuff that he himself hates but uses to get the job done. I do not need mongrels to stick around: using them as meat shields that double targeting, remote bombs is fine. Just don't make them look like a sick dog; make it look freakin' nasty and powerful.

That's because we have only seen a few spells from the WD, most of which are low leveled ones, unlike the Wizard and Barbarian where most of their skills has been revealed, up till the 4th Tier. It's not surprising since these two classes are really just improved version of D2's.

I still don't get why people compare the WD to the necromancer, they are two completely different characters.

They are just whining because they don't get to see the necromancer back in D3, which (thank god Blizzard) will be ridiculous and stupid. Summoning skeletons and shooting bony projectiles...:yawn:

Apparently the WD is something new, they need time to really polish the character.
IMO, they are nice enough to showcase a new character class, so be thankful.

And we ain't see anything out of the WD, yet.

windforce

14-06-2009, 23:38

I get the feeling that many people are trying to convince themselves that the Witch Doctor is cool. I must admit I was trying to do the same thing but I can't continue to kid myself... The Witch Doctor is lame. He has boring, underwhelming spells (yes, I'm aware we have only been introduced to a few, but if the spells they showed were supposed to impress me, they failed miserably), a hideous look... I want to play as a badass warrior or dark, mysterious magic user... not some hunched-over skinny old guy with boring *** spells and a mask that makes him look, as someone in this thread so accurately put it, like an insect. I really tried to be impressed with this new class, and I defended him against my friends. But truth be told I just have no desire to play as the WD. The barbarian looks awesome, the wizard looks like it has potential to be great. The WD is just a joke as far as I'm concerned.

raveharu

14-06-2009, 23:39

I get the feeling that many people are trying to convince themselves that the Witch Doctor is cool.

Your feelings are wrong.

I must admit I was trying to do the same thing but I can't continue to kid myself...

Yeah you can't continue to kid yourself.

That the necromancer will never return.

The Witch Doctor is lame. He has boring, underwhelming spells (yes, I'm aware we have only been introduced to a few, but if the spells they showed were supposed to impress me, they failed miserably), a hideous look...

The skills showcased are just starting game spells, and they already are much more impressive than the Necromancer's end game spells, both visually and technically. Apparently you need spectacles.

I really tried to be impressed with this new class, and I defended him against my friends.

I want to play as a badass warrior or dark, mysterious magic user... not some hunched-over skinny old guy with boring *** spells and a mask that makes him look, as someone in this thread so accurately put it, like an insect. But truth be told I just have no desire to play as the WD. The barbarian looks awesome, the wizard looks like it has potential to be great. The WD is just a joke as far as I'm concerned.

Apparently you are the joke.

windforce

15-06-2009, 02:18

raveharu

15-06-2009, 02:40

raveharu...

I never even mentioned the necromancer in my post. Nothing I said has anything to do with the necromancer. Learn to read.

The fact that you meticulously dissected my short post, only to say absolutely nothing (except imply that you are angry that I don't like the witch doctor), just makes you look like a tool.

It doesn't say in this thread it is forbidden to use the necromancer as an example.
I'm using him as an example against you.

Anyway your post lacks substantial examples in the first place, I'm just providing further insights to show how shallow and tasteless your whines are.

AtomicJ

15-06-2009, 02:42

windforce, I'm not attacking you, so please don't take it that way. I feel all Diablo fans' criticisms and opinions are valid, and fault no one for their concerns. But you seem to be very disappointed by the classes in Diablo 3 so far. I noticed you're not a fan of the Wiz, either. Are you just a die hard Barb fan (like me!), or are you really displeased with D3's choices all around so far? I consider myself a true D2 fan, and I'm very happy with D3 so far (I have only a few, somewhat minor criticisms). I'm just trying to understand what differences you see between D2 and D3 that are turning you off the sequel so much, as I must not be seeing them.

raveharu

15-06-2009, 02:48

windforce

15-06-2009, 03:03

It doesn't say in this thread it is forbidden to use the necromancer as an example.
I'm using him as an example against you.

Anyway your post lacks substantial examples in the first place, I'm just providing further insights to show how shallow and tasteless your whines are.

Are you kidding me? You responded to me by claiming that I'm kidding myself that the necromancer is not returning, even thought I never once mentioned the necromancer.

And you provided insights? All you did was quote me and then say that I'm kidding myself or something. Honestly if anything it's you who is shallow just for trying to pass such a huge log of ****.

windforce, I'm not attacking you, so please don't take it that way. I feel all Diablo fans' criticisms and opinions are valid, and fault no one for their concerns. But you seem to be very disappointed by the classes in Diablo 3 so far. I noticed you're not a fan of the Wiz, either. Are you just a die hard Barb fan (like me!), or are you really displeased with D3's choices all around so far? I consider myself a true D2 fan, and I'm very happy with D3 so far (I have only a few, somewhat minor criticisms). I'm just trying to understand what differences you see between D2 and D3 that are turning you off the sequel so much, as I must not be seeing them.

I've got nothing against the wizard except for the name "wizard" which just reminds me of Harry Potter. And there are a few other minor things that annoy me about the wizard, like the fact that she's a teenager. I don't like teenagers in my games, they're not intimidating, and they're whiney bastards. But in general I think the wiz is decent.

My beef with Diablo's new direction is that they are removing many elements from the original diablo games that defined what diablo is all about. A lot of it has to do with removing the theme of unlawfulness that made the game unique. For example the removal of the hostile button... but there's no chance I'm starting another debate about that topic. Please, don't even ask me to elaborate. There's also the fact that Jay Wilson and co. have made it kind of obvious that they never spent much time playing diablo 2 in depth, which leads me to believe that they are using WoW as their standard instead of diablo 2.

In general though, I think they could have messed up the diablo franchise much more than they actually did, and for that I'm greatful. I'm still waiting to find out more about the game before I declare it garbage or genius.

Jimbob

15-06-2009, 03:21

I won't make a final judgment on this witch doctor until after they release more info. I mean come on; they aren't even in beta yet and they still have two more classes to announce as well. I expect the Witch Doctor to be a lot more cool by the time the game comes out.

As for the Necro fans; don't worry and stop complaining because the Necromancer will most likely be added in the hinted expansion. If you don't like the Witch Doctor than just play as someone else in the mean time or just stick to Diablo 2.

Sepharia

15-06-2009, 04:47

I'm certainly in the camp of people that are going to miss the Necromancer. It was easily my favorite class in Diablo II... However..

This is not Diablo II. Blizzard wanted to try something different instead of rolling out more of the same, and I certainly won't begrudge them for that. I also think it's quite preemptive to talk about how badly someone can hate the WD given how little we know about them. I think until a finalized *and* complete skill list comes out, nobody can really be totally sure how much they are going to like it.. That is, of course, unless they're so set on throwing a fit that they aren't going to like it no matter how cool it ends up being.

Seriously, some people here are crying like a rich kid that got a blue corvette for their birthday when they didn't get the red one like they wanted. Give it time, give a chance, and just enjoy the game for what it is rather than what you think it should be. :)

Mad Mantis

15-06-2009, 23:47

I still don't get why people compare the WD to the necromancer, they are two completely different characters.

The Necro is the Summoner and the WD has summons. Necro is the Master of Curses and the WD has curse-like skills. The Necro has barriers and commands the undead and the WD has Zombie Wall. The Necro focused on debuffs and indirect damage. The WD also appears to focus on debuffs and indirect damage. The Necro was the darkest character from DII and the WD also appears to be the dark character.

The popular image for WD's focuses around zombie's, snakes, cannibals, big masks and giant crock pots filled with snobby British explorers. They dabble in the undead and are generally seen as unsavory characters. They fit in what one could expect for the successor of the Necromancer.

It might not be an entirely waterproof case and certainly all the options at this point in time are still open. However keep in mind that it isn't such a weird idea to think of the WD as the replacement of the Necro.

Summoning skeletons and shooting bony projectiles...:yawn:

Putting it like that you can make any character seem boring. Aren't you the least bit interested in what they could have done with the character if only they had given him the same treatment as they have given the Barb and the Sorceress?

And we ain't see anything out of the WD, yet.

And herein lies the problem. Blizz takes a gamble by introducing a very funny looking character. Hardly the proper hero type that we are expecting. In fact a lot of people dislike him based on his hunched-over posture alone. The bright greens and purples don't really add to his atmosphere. A lot of people view the character as a joke or as comedic relief at best.

He is introduced at the same time as an old favorite. A favorite that got a fantastic remake. All the glory from the WD's introduction is immediately stolen by the comeback of the Barb. A grizzled old warrior who looks even more powerful than the old Barb. His skills are flashy and immediately showoff his power. Next to him the so-called replacement of the Necro looks weak and unimposing.

To make matters worse they do not show any fantastic spells. What the WD gets are pretty lame spells. Most of which immediately feel gimmicky and very situational. One even gets a graphics overhaul a few weeks later. In an interview Blizz even says that they are finding it hard to develop skills for the WD because he is such an "unique character". All they know is that they don't want his minions to tank for him. Meanwhile the Wiz and Barb have an almost complete assortment of skills. Not something that inspires confidence in the character. Almost a year since his introduction and all we have to show for it are two new spells. Some toads that explode and bats on fire. The bats look cool, the toads less so.

So what did the fans get to see after the introduction of the WD? My sig makes the general feelings after the introduction quite clear. Witch Doctor = top half of a Flayer Shaman = cracked-out, grass-wearing, jungle hobo = bobbing clown who vomits leaves a.k.a. Bobo the clowning village idiot. Hardly something that inspires confidence in the class. It might not be the final image of the WD, but it is his first impression. Wherever the WD might end up he still has the stigma of his introduction.

I think that Blizz botched the WD. They wanted to impress people with the launch of D3. They wanted to showoff classes. The Barb was one of the first completed characters and a recognizable icon. In order to balance out the returning character they needed to show off a new character otherwise people would say that D3 would be the same as DII.1. They could show either the Wiz or the WD. The Wiz bares too much resemblance to the old Sorc so she wasn't appropriate. The only other option they had at that point was the WD. Apparently a class that they hadn't spend too much time on. So you have a class with a clear purpose and completely worked out skills versus a class with really only the purpose of taking an old playstyle and changing it. The WD got the short end of the stick and a huge stigma attached to him because of it.

In case any of you are still reading my very much tl;dr post, let me just say that I was one of the people disappointed with the WD. I'm still disappointed with the WD. Not because I see him as the replacement of the Necromancer. I'm disappointed because I think the class can be so much more. His visuals really let him down. He looks funny and frail with an absurd knuckle-dragging hunchback while he should look sinister and intimidating.
His spells lack visual impact. They aren't over the top enough. The detonation of his mongrels should result in a gory explosion with limbs and skeletons flying around. His spitting of locusts shouldn't look like he is vomiting neon-colored leaves. They should crawl from his entire body making the WD resemble those people covered in bees. His lore speaks of fires, explosions, poisonous spirits, undead creatures, human sacrifices and a all round atmosphere of terror. Exactly the things you would expect from a scary and probably insane WD. Blizz completely failed to show any of this. What they showed was more the caricature of what the WD could be.

raveharu

17-06-2009, 02:34

Mad Mantis, I can only presume the reason why you do not like the WD yet is due to lack of details from Blizzard.
Let us wait and see the outcome then, perhaps they would give more in the August Blizzon.

Everyone has their own opinions, I respect yours since you gave a legitimate argument.

But to me, even with the lack of details, the WD is excellent, and has outshone the necromancer in every way.

Whatever it is, you have to live to the fact that the WD will always be one of the main classes in Diablo 3.

LonelyAnon

17-06-2009, 08:36

Sniff, leave the good doctor alone
Why can't we all just get along?
I'm with raveharu, the doctor takes on the necro, and in some

Sjeng

17-06-2009, 18:17

The thing is, we won't know how the WD will look after he changes his armor and puts on a different helmet. It could change the image of the WD entirely. Do characters in Diablo II look nice while wearing armor like Leviathan or some random purple armor? Imo, no.

lazylink

18-06-2009, 23:06

I honestly don't see the point of putting the necromancer into D3 instead of the witchdoctor, in either case the fanboys will complain.

If the necro was in D3 and all they did was copy+paste the skill trees and improve the graphics then people would complain that Blizzard was unoriginal.

If the necro was in D3 and they gave him completely new skills then people would say that the new necro was just an imposter.

Basically, whatever Blizzard ends up doing, people will complain.

But, I will admit immediately that the Barbarian outclassed the Witchdoctor. And I didn't even like the Barbarian in D2!

Kingu

19-06-2009, 00:26

I don't see why you assume they would either only update skills grafics or give him completely new skills, especially if you look what they did to barb and sorc/wizz.
And if they just did that copy paste, then we wouldn't be waiting for it in a first place.

And as many other posters here, it's rather qurious what they would cookup for him, if he came back.

raveharu

19-06-2009, 01:07

But, I will admit immediately that the Barbarian outclassed the Witchdoctor. And I didn't even like the Barbarian in D2!

Because they gave an overall makeover for the Barb, coupled with the new fury system and superbly improved skills and visualisations, he is no longer the noisy clumsy fat BOBO we knew in D2.

But remember we have only seen like 10% of the WD and like, 90% of the Barbarian so it's pretty unfair to compare them. Besides, one's a caster whilst the other is melee, totally two different play styles :whistling:

Thrakhath

19-06-2009, 01:34

Seems to me that the main complaint about the WD is a lack of 'epicness'. I agree with this to a point - firebomb seems wimpish somehow compared to cleave or magic missile, which are equivalents.

But Locust Swarm, Soul Harvest, Horrify and Mass Confusion all seem pretty epic spells to me, and I'm sure there'll be more to come.

windforce

19-06-2009, 02:09

I don't know what I find more amusing.

Reading some of the most biased negativity I've ever seen.

OR

The fact that more than half of 'those' people will be gushing about how much the WD rocks when the game ships.

The latter, I think, heh..

What makes the negativity biased? Merely having an opinion on something does not make one biased.

That said, I base my negativity of the WD on unquestionably objective reasoning... for one he looks idiotic. The green and purple color schemes (complete with a glowing purple wand *gasp*), combined with the skinny alien/insect-like appearence and lack of intimidation makes it the most unappealing "hero" class that I have ever witnessed in a game. His attacks look boring and cheesy. I think the thing that makes casters cool is their crowd-control spells. I like to right-click and see all the monsters on my screed perish in spectacular display of carnage. The witch doctor's "locust swarms" just don't cut it. It's an underwhelming spell. I'm gonna stop here because the all the other classes will probably rock hard enough to make me not care about the crappy WD.

raveharu

19-06-2009, 02:20

What makes the negativity biased? Merely having an opinion on something does not make one biased.

That said, I base my negativity of the WD on unquestionably objective reasoning... for one he looks idiotic. The green and purple color schemes (complete with a glowing purple wand *gasp*), combined with the skinny alien/insect-like appearence and lack of intimidation makes it the most unappealing "hero" class that I have ever witnessed in a game. His attacks look boring and cheesy. I think the thing that makes casters cool is their crowd-control spells. I like to right-click and see all the monsters on my screed perish in spectacular display of carnage. The witch doctor's "locust swarms" just don't cut it. It's an underwhelming spell. I'm gonna stop here because the all the other classes will probably rock hard enough to make me not care about the crappy WD.

Yayaya you and the haters made your point, seriously stop posting the same things over and over again, it gets boring.

It doesn't matter because the WD will BE in D3, if you hate him then too bad, you have one less class to play. Your loss.

Will Blizzard care? NO. Do we care? NO. Kthxbye.

windforce

19-06-2009, 15:56

Yayaya you and the haters made your point, seriously stop posting the same things over and over again, it gets boring.

It doesn't matter because the WD will BE in D3, if you hate him then too bad, you have one less class to play. Your loss.

Will Blizzard care? NO. Do we care? NO. Kthxbye.

Why do you assume Blizzard does not care if people don't like the class? I think they care a lot actually, and I bet that the WD sees a considerable makeover before the game's release. And if you don't care about people's opinions about the WD then why are you reading a thread called "I Hate the Wich Doctor"...

Romak

19-06-2009, 17:52

It's only a fact that most people prefer the Barbarian and Wizard on the Witch Doctor. Let's say that all classes are equally powerful because of good balance, the only thing that's left for the player is to choose his style. And so far we have 3 options... 'the powerful and brutal barbarian', 'the intelligent and stubborn wizard', and 'the freaky weird voodoo alchemist'. So I dunno... there's not alot wrong with a freaky voodoo guy, but when people have the chance to choose between the 3, polls prove that the WD failed. We still don't know alot of WD skills compared to the other classes so the actual results may be different. Still, in my opinion there should also be a change in the WD archeype, maybe make him more about evil. But hey... it could be alot worse, so far I'm okay with the current classes.

sreda

26-06-2009, 19:04

I don't know if anyone is like me, but I just was really underwhelmed by the witch doctor.

First, I don't really want to play a class hunched over like an ape dragging his knuckles. But, secondly, he's just really underwhelming compared to the barbarian's completely over the top effects. I you cannot match that stunning performance with another class, you need to get rid of that class or rework it. Seriously, it was like seeing the Toronto Space Needle next to a barn silo.

Second, as a person that has played necromancer for several ladders in a row as my main, I hate the witch doctor. I loved my pets. I loved my UNDEAD pets. I realize they are lag central when you have 30. But, they could easily just make them bigger, and stronger and fewer. Give them multiple attacks on surrounding mobs as they level. Ditto the skeletal mages. Allow me one revive summon that turns into a horrible, massive beast with crushing blow and AE stun that lasts only 15 seconds or something.

I was really excited about the barbarian, then this waddling disaster came out and I was like... "are they kidding?". THIS is the new necromancer? Witch doctor sounds like a guy that failed the necromancer final exam.

I'm reasonably excited about the game, but reasonably disheartened about the loss of necromancers. That's my play style. I will try to adjust to something else, but just looking at the thing was irritating.

If anyone from Blizzard reads this by some chance, please reconsider.

It's amazing how one persons trash is another mans treasure. I personally can't wait to play the Witch Doctor. I played D2 Necromancer for the longest time, and I don't see the transition to Witch Doctor that big. The skills haven't even been released yet, and I like how he's hunched over and twitching. He's more convincing and ghoulish, that's my style of play. I like being evil, and I love minions. I hope WD fairs well in PVP combat, and doesn't represent the same failures as the necromancer summoner in Diablo 2.

accelerator

07-07-2009, 12:24

There is one simple problem with the Witchdoctor. The gameplay footage version isn't gothic enough to belong in Diablo. I would accept it anywhere else as a unique idea and quite funky, but funky is not Diablo. Just look at all the other attempts to follow Diablo from the more realistic Titan Quest, to a decent attempt in Sacred, to the far east version in Dungeon Runners. All lack that gritty medieval atmosphere and despite any of them possibly beuing a decent game under it, they cant compare to that buzz from Diablo's artistic direction.

One plus point with the WD though is if you look at the character creation version. That guy looks a lot more toned down and subtle, very reminiscent of the Necro from D2.

Diablo 1 is where they should have gone back to with the general style. There is little precedent for cartoony funkiness even in Diablo 2, the closest we get is alternative settings with the desert/jungle which to me were the worst areas of the game.

CrazyPurple

07-07-2009, 15:53

What makes the negativity biased? Merely having an opinion on something does not make one biased.

A negative opinion, by definition, is biased.

Taken from Wikipedia:
"Bias is a term used to describe a tendency or preference towards a particular perspective, ideology or result, especially when the tendency interferes with the ability to be impartial, unprejudiced, or objective."

You can't possibly be objective because you're smashing a class for a game that isn't even out yet. :thumbup: I am biased by the fact that it is the necromancer replacement, a class that I love - but it will still be given a chance by me, and many others I'm sure.

Yayaya you and the haters made your point, seriously stop posting the same things over and over again, it gets boring.

It doesn't matter because the WD will BE in D3, if you hate him then too bad, you have one less class to play. Your loss.

Will Blizzard care? NO. Do we care? NO. Kthxbye.

Taken from Wikipedia:
"The right to freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR recognizes the right to freedom of speech as "the right to hold opinions without interference. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression"." :tongue:

There is one simple problem with the Witchdoctor. The gameplay footage version isn't gothic enough to belong in Diablo.

We have yet to see the Witch Doctor in it's final form, wearing full-on metal armor. I'm willing to bet that it won't disappoint.

Fackelare

07-07-2009, 17:12

There is one simple problem with the Witchdoctor. The gameplay footage version isn't gothic enough to belong in Diablo.

I'm not quite sure what your defenition of gothic is, but I don't think the barbarian or the wizard are the least bit gothic. But the witchdoctor is the most 'gothic' character out there. How is running around barely clothed with a 200 pound axe more gothic than summoning zombies from the ground to tear your enemy apart?

The big problem is not the 'gothicness' but rather what you expected and want diablo III to be, and in your version there cannot be a witchdoctor, only the more classical fantasy classes (i.e. western medieval times etc. NOT gothic..).

Or am I missing something here?

windforce

17-07-2009, 05:37

A negative opinion, by definition, is biased.

Taken from Wikipedia:
"Bias is a term used to describe a tendency or preference towards a particular perspective, ideology or result, especially when the tendency interferes with the ability to be impartial, unprejudiced, or objective."

You can't possibly be objective because you're smashing a class for a game that isn't even out yet. :thumbup: I am biased by the fact that it is the necromancer replacement, a class that I love - but it will still be given a chance by me, and many others I'm sure.

You're only concentrating on half the definition which is why you misunderstand what it means. If you read the whole definition, you will see that bias is a form of prejudice. If bias simply meant having an opinion, then the word would be meaningless. It is specifically having an opinion based on prejudice or lack of objectivity. If I were to have formulated my opinion before even having seen the WD, that would be biased. But I saw enough to formulate an opinion based on all the info that is available to us.

WaveMasterX

21-07-2009, 05:08

maybe id agree with this thread if it was an expansion to d2 and the box said "we've decided that instead of keeping the necro we have taken it out and replaced it with the WD"

BUT seeing as this isnt a d2 xpac...its a NEW game (hence why it says d3 instead of d2) and the fact that theres an interview or post floating out there on the interweb that says somthing along the lines of "New characters for our New game, but u may see some of the old favorites in a possible xpac to d3...you never know"

so like other people have stated, quit crying about how ur poor necro isnt in d3 and either play a dif class...stick to d2....or cross ur fingers and hope they add them in the xpack when its released...

(and fyi Necro's are awesome, its my highest singleplayer character and my highest on battle.net but I, like most others have realized that this is a new game set 20 years AFTER the last one...for all we know the necromancer could of either evolved or devolved into the witch doctor...or could of been killed off by some war... we will never know unless its put into the diablo lore or explained by blizz in the future)

lintu

23-07-2009, 12:11

when i saw gameplay vids of the witchdoctor, i directly decided to play this class. even if it looks a little bit like an insect, the skills are just too awesome to miss.

GunPowderScarrab

28-07-2009, 01:05

witch-doctors are kinda un-diabloish, not so goulish or evil, but rather purple, sparkly and hunched. i agree. diablo 3's gonna be fun, but on a whole different level than the diablo series. i'm psyched about his skills and wierd masks, but other than that, he's kinda wierd looking.

Sass

28-07-2009, 03:57

Idk, the druid kinda looks weird to me when not in any wolf form, but many like him. I think people just have to warm up to the WD and get used to him.

But never have I thought he was sparkly O.O

GetCatTonight

31-07-2009, 23:06

I love the witch doctor. If you ask me, he isn't the new necro, he's the new druid. He just doesn't have shapeshift and is dishing off the necros theme. I'm gonna be expecting another new character using the necro/druid hybrid, such as a shapeshifter that can turn into golems, and uses most 'elemental' magic like the druid did.

And who can think he looks bad? Whenever I look at him I have to think of this guy (http://content.imagesocket.com/images/396790_5008b6.jpg) :I

raveharu

31-07-2009, 23:39

I'm gonna be expecting another new character using the necro/druid hybrid, such as a shapeshifter that can turn into golems, and uses most 'elemental' magic like the druid did.

Ewww, doesn't sound feasible IMO.

Beatrix

01-08-2009, 18:49

1st of all.. the witch docter aint finished yet. - they completed 2/3 skill tree's, and they are still workin' on the witch doc.

2nd.. all I could say was.. I loved them, when I saw the game play.. im either gonna take a wizzard or a w. doc.

Darkflight

02-08-2009, 22:26

I think the version of the Witch Doctor shown in the movies on Youtube seems like a very good first cut of him. A little polishing and he might become my favourite character.

theshonen

22-08-2009, 21:51

If the Witch Doctor wasn't replacing the necromancer, I wouldn't hate him as much. Blizzard said that the Witch Doctor isn't meant to replace the necromancer, but I really doubt that with the similarities that Blizzard will bring back the necromancer to Diablo 3, which really bothers me because he was my first and favorite character in Diablo 2.

Also, not being able to seem the bone spells in new high-grade graphics really makes me sad :(

Sonolin

23-08-2009, 06:46

I haven't read this thread (40 pages.. wow) but you sir are pretty silly to say that the witch doctor is less interesting than the other classes.

Let's see.. so far we have:

- Barbarian
- Witch Doctor
- Wizard
- Monk

The barb - definitely an awesome class, but it has been used in d2 so.. yea.

Wizard - I like the 1v1 aspect of this, but... it's a wizard. Most fantasy games have this.

Monk - more interesting than the other two, but still not as unique as the witch doctor.

AND... witch doctor - I have never seen this in a game before, and it definitely has its own feel to it. It looks NOTHING like either the Necro or the Druid (much more druid-like, but it is still very unique).

You might not like the CLASS, but it is the most unique class in d3 so far hands down IMO.

(After reading my post, it kind of sounds like I dislike the other classes... very much not so - I want to play them all hehe. Diablo games always have a way of doing that :))

Sass

23-08-2009, 18:48

CoQui

23-08-2009, 18:55

LoL, big thread. While I don't hate the Witch Doctor and love fresh new ideas by Blizzard and like to see that in D3, Witch Doc is my least favorite ATM. He looks almost out of place although the monk can rival that. I prefer more armored guys wielding swords and axes in a dark gothic fantasy world as opposed to clothes, masks, and using fists and feet against monster with sharp teeth. But, we are so far from release that I have no doubt Blizzard will look back on each character and see which ones need a buff in appearance and effects/skills. This will come in time and I'm sure we'll see more Witch Doc fans and players out there when that time comes. For now I'll be part of the Witch Doctor is the weaker of the 4 shown so far and could use some help. BTW-I don't think Blizzard will change it sole on one person's opinion out of the millions of Diablo fans/players, lol.

Sass

23-08-2009, 19:22

So, did you also hate the paladin, nec, druid, sin, sorc, wiz, and zon?

None of the above are a dark gothic tank.

Ghoulz

03-09-2009, 14:10

So when going by similarities, he's a druid / sorc replacement.

Nice, now there's no way we can have another spell caster here.

w8 aminute...

The WD seems more like a mix of necromancer/druid/assassin.

Sass

04-09-2009, 14:23

I've yet to see a similarity to sin O.o

He's closer to druid / sorc than anything.

rlstills

04-09-2009, 18:54

Well I for one feel you can not really say a character sucks till you actually play it. That being said try the witch dr out, if you dont like him then by all means bash him.

raveharu

06-09-2009, 04:49

Why is everyone comparing D3 with D2's classes, they are both different games...

Sass

06-09-2009, 14:26

Why is everyone comparing D3 with D2's classes, they are both different games...People do see an eerie similarity.

barb still the barb, but the wiz = sorc, monk = paladin, ranged #5 = zon, and insist the WD = nec.

I see the archetypes maybe being filled, but the chars are very, very different.

Cxplorer

06-09-2009, 16:06

I really existed about the witch doctor. Like some people said in the forum, I am also tired of the same old D&D, rpg nerdish class.

popenfresh

07-09-2009, 22:59

I think people are missing the point here. Lots of haters are saying the WD doesn’t look awesome or epic. Blizz never indented to make him look epic or awesome the way the barb, wiz or monk do. The WD was meant to be a more sinister and unusual character than the ones we’re used to seeing in most fantasy rpgs. And that’s one of the main reasons I love him so much. He’s a frail and weird looking individual, and I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what Blizz wanted him to be. His spells are unique and fit his overall theme pretty well I think. They’re not supposed to be flashy or imposing, like the wizard’s, but more in between the lines of the bizarre voodoo concept. I believe he’s much darker and more imposing than the rather generic looking necromancer, a class that provoked quite a lot of controversy as well (before I went on these forums I always figured him to be the most unpopular char). I can understand why so many people hate the WD, but I’m just the kind of person who’s much more attracted to unusual and out of place themes. I’m pretty sure Blizz was well aware that the WD would evoke the most controversy, which means they actually succeeded quite well in creating a character that would go against the archetypical heroes we see in most games, otherwise people would just classify him as the same old boring stuff we’ve seen a million times before. The fact that so many people dislike him means the WD fits his overall concept perfectly.

loesr

08-09-2009, 00:32

a black kid

08-09-2009, 00:54

But, I loved the Necro, so I do love original character ideas.

the necromancer isnt an original character idea... a pale evil looking guy raising the dead and cursing things has been in so so many video games, d2 definitely wasnt the first.

popenfresh

08-09-2009, 01:03

It's a niche character - if your not in the niche, it will never make sense to you.

I'm not, I find it both comically outrageous, completely without lore foundation and inaccurately derivative (which is rather an oxymoron). But, I loved the Necro, so I do love original character ideas. Lots of folks never got the Necro at all.
Conversely I think I played the Assassin once, and that just for the novelty.

Unless the WD really blows my mind, he's already the best muling character to me.

Well I think the WD makes alot more sense lore-wise than the amazon, paladin or druid… But the lore is a rather insignificant factor (I admit, I am a lore geek, but as long as they don’t completely rape the story like they did in WoW I won't complain). You said so yourself: the assa might not be an enjoyable class for you, but she makes perfect sense in the Diablo universe.

As for the appearance, that’s of course a matter of opinion but I think he looks much more sinister and evil than any of the other D3 classes and certainly less comical than the necro.

You’re right of course about him being a niche character. I think this whole thread pretty much proves your point right there. :P

Jimbob

08-09-2009, 01:40

So, he's a witch and a doctor all at the same time? Good for him.

Pode

08-09-2009, 02:01

I think the witchdoctor is the coolest character they have yet. The barbarian is over rated and old, the monk seems un-diablo like, but yes i like the wizard to. The witchdoctor is new and refreshing, his skills might not be the biggest and flashiest right now, but they arent done with him. Summoning zombies just sounds cool to me. He will be my first character unless we get a hunter like character with a bow.

sunkenfaith

08-09-2009, 04:09

I love the WD, he is sort of like the anti-hero.

Atech

10-09-2009, 14:22

Pretty sure there will be some spells/skills that make you OMFG.

http://www.diablowiki.net/Witch_Doctor_skills
Just look at the names of these

Gargantuan (http://www.diablowiki.net/Gargantuan)
Pit of Fire (http://www.diablowiki.net/Pit_of_Fire)
Fetish Army (http://www.diablowiki.net/Fetish_Army)
Spirit Barrage (http://www.diablowiki.net/Spirit_Barrage)

Smash

10-09-2009, 16:48

Atech

10-09-2009, 17:56

you didn't play WoW did you? Names and action do not work together in blizzard games. You can see OMFG name but you will not get OMFG effect

What makes you think there will not be OMFG effects just as each other class haves??

And I have 3 lvl 80 WoW characters. Im quite familiar with Blizzard skill names and effects.

Mad Mantis

11-09-2009, 09:15

You can see OMFG name but you will not get OMFG effect

I cast upon you ... DOOM (http://goblins.keenspot.com/d/20051215.html)!

theshonen

11-09-2009, 14:16

So when going by similarities, he's a druid / sorc replacement.

Nice, now there's no way we can have another spell caster here.

w8 aminute...

...explain to me how a class that casts curses and summons undead creatures had any similarities to the druid or sorceress? The only thing that comes to mind is the locust swarm and firebomb, but if you were really going to be that picky about it you would have also said the witch doctor was a assassin replacement because of how similar firebomb was to fire blast. At that point you're just being ridiculous.

I'm not saying there's no way blizzard will bring back the necromancer, but the odds are pretty meek. I can't imagine why they would include a class that can ALSO do horrify and confusion.

Sass

11-09-2009, 18:49

Zombies aren't going to be enough to convince me he's similar to the necromancer.

Zombie wall's mechanic and use is just like fire wall. His fire and nova effects are very sorc-esque, but no, not literally just like a sorc.

Yes, fire bomb is like fire blast, but without MA, traps, and any shadow focus, only one skill possibly links him to the sin. It's like saying the druid is a copy of a sorc because his arctic frost works like inferno. Or that the WD is just like a barb since the horrify and grim ward thing. Close, ish, but not really a similar char.

Now WD and druid would work. Summons aren't as focused as on a nec, he gets a big one (which necs don't get unless you revive an urdar or something). He also gets enough elemental focus to be similar to the elemental tree. However, I'm aware a druid doesn't cast a bug spray, but even he has poison skills :P

With these similarities, the WD still is not very similar or practically a replacement of any class. He's unique enough, but as you also pointed out, skills are bound to be the same.

Smash

11-09-2009, 22:30

I cast upon you ... DOOM (http://goblins.keenspot.com/d/20051215.html)!
Lol, it is so true.

So far WD is weird char that mix many mechanics from other chars but to had his own playstyle is hard to say.

Mongrels are like Druid wolves.
Horrify is like Barbarian shout.
Fire bomb is Assasin's fire blast.
Zombie Wall is like Necro Bone Wall with spikes (i do not expect zombies to start wander around that would too much for Blizzard to pull off...)
...
etc.

Btw Non of this is really epic spell.

So far, as far (lol) as creation of environment and music go Blizz get 5/5 and 4/5 but for Chars design it is 1/5.
Copy/paste thing don't show them in good light, they couldn't even create original warrior without ending with copy of Barbarian with WoW's rage....

Btw 2. I still wonder how our old Barb forget how to use mana.

popodomo

11-09-2009, 23:59

Lol, it is so true.

So far WD is weird char that mix many mechanics from other chars but to had his own playstyle is hard to say.

Mongrels are like Druid wolves.
Horrify is like Barbarian shout.
Fire bomb is Assasin's fire blast.
Zombie Wall is like Necro Bone Wall with spikes (i do not expect zombies to start wander around that would too much for Blizzard to pull off...)
...
etc.

Btw Non of this is really epic spell.

So far, as far (lol) as creation of environment and music go Blizz get 5/5 and 4/5 but for Chars design it is 1/5.
Copy/paste thing don't show them in good light, they couldn't even create original warrior without ending with copy of Barbarian with WoW's rage....

Btw 2. I still wonder how our old Barb forget how to use mana.

I always thought the idea of a Barbarian using mana was really wierd in the first place, same thing with the Assassin. The Assassin is suppose to be the anti-thesis of a sorcerer right? She is suppose to use "Chi" or "Chakra" as her inner power source as to not invite the corruption of magic.

As for whether the spells are not "epic" enough, aren't people complaining things kind of get out of hand with a full group of players in a game? I think the Witchdoctor's Zombie Wall is more epic then frankly any Necromancer spell in DII. You also have the remember we will have skill runes to further customize the skill into something to our liking. So maybe that Zombie Wall becomes something of a Mobile Zombie Wall, a walking shield per se of zombies as you firebomb from behind. Or maybe the Zombie Wall becomes an Exploding Zombie Wall that does poison AOE, the possibilities are endless, which is something I am quite giddy about with the Skill Rune system.

To address your concern over unique classes, I don't think you will ever see something like the Flagellant fan made class, for example, in a Diablo game simply because the name isn't simple enough to identify what that class is all about. While it is truly unique and a pretty sweet idea, "flagellant" is not a word that is commonly thrown around in gaming or life for that matter. Most people would probably have to look it up and that defeats one of Blizzard's mottos, "Easy to play, hard to master".

Unregister

12-09-2009, 06:17

Srikandi

12-09-2009, 07:57

NONE of the character classes have fully original skills. You can't fault the WD on that. He is at least a bit more original than the others, since he mixes up familiar types of abilities in a relatively new way. That's a plus, not a minus.

And the reason for the lack of originality in skills more generally would be that it's pretty much all been done. Hundreds or thousands of RPGs down the road, pretty much everything that would make sense and be viable in a game has been thought of.

As for the original complaint of this thread, I think it's kind of funny that tough, macho, hardcore Diablo players are apparently more worried than a teenage girl playing Sims or Barbie Adventure about whether their characters are pretty or not ;)

I like anything different; the further it is from the standard archetypes, the happier I am. So far, the WD is my favorite class.

Atech

12-09-2009, 10:28

I still dont get it how you are complaining about not epic spells, when you have seen maybe 1/3 of them?

Fire_Dragon

12-09-2009, 20:45

Hmm, interesting post. Yet...

:troll:

Smash

13-09-2009, 14:52

I still dont get it how you are complaining about not epic spells, when you have seen maybe 1/3 of them?

Because:
a) I am not optimistic guy.
b) As you said it is already maybe 1/3 of spells that are not epic (graphic and mechanic wise) that you will have to deal with.

Mind you i do not complain about Wizard or Barb as much as about Witch Doctor. He has a big potential that is going to waste because Blizzard has terrible class designers.

When you look at WD i think about spirits/voodoo magic, alchemist, nature and maybe others all with dark touch, but i cannot find it in current character progress and that make me sad.

NONE of the character classes have fully original skills. You can't fault the WD on that. He is at least a bit more original than the others, since he mixes up familiar types of abilities in a relatively new way. That's a plus, not a minus.

And the reason for the lack of originality in skills more generally would be that it's pretty much all been done. Hundreds or thousands of RPGs down the road, pretty much everything that would make sense and be viable in a game has been thought of.

As for the original complaint of this thread, I think it's kind of funny that tough, macho, hardcore Diablo players are apparently more worried than a teenage girl playing Sims or Barbie Adventure about whether their characters are pretty or not ;)

I like anything different; the further it is from the standard archetypes, the happier I am. So far, the WD is my favorite class.

Untrue, i would prepare much more interesting spells for Witch Doctor not only by well fitting them into class, adding synergy between them (natural not flat like the one from d2 1.10) but making spell more complex and this way more fun to use.

But i do not work for Blizzard, do not get their salary i can only ask myself what guy response for this is doing and how bad is Jay Wilson as lead designer and hom much his love for God of War arcade style is destroying Diablo 3.

raveharu

13-09-2009, 15:32

Because:
a) I am not optimistic guy.
b) As you said it is already maybe 1/3 of spells that are not epic (graphic and mechanic wise) that you will have to deal with.

Mind you i do not complain about Wizard or Barb as much as about Witch Doctor. He has a big potential that is going to waste because Blizzard has terrible class designers.

When you look at WD i think about spirits/voodoo magic, alchemist, nature and maybe others all with dark touch, but i cannot find it in current character progress and that make me sad.

Untrue, i would prepare much more interesting spells for Witch Doctor not only by well fitting them into class, adding synergy between them (natural not flat like the one from d2 1.10) but making spell more complex and this way more fun to use.

But i do not work for Blizzard, do not get their salary i can only ask myself what guy response for this is doing and how bad is Jay Wilson as lead designer and hom much his love for God of War arcade style is destroying Diablo 3.

:troll: :rolleyes:

Hmm let's see, so far those who tried the demo all had positive feedback about the WD.

Wait... that pretty much applies to all the other classes too :scratchchin:

Maybe you (and those who make similar threads like these) should sit down, take a deep breath, and learn to ask yourself WHY, before posting redundant whines and complaints.