Talk:Guide to playing as a necromancer

"If your playing as a necromancers you have one of two reasons. You want an undead army. Or you want to make a warrior cry." Not even remotely true. You could also be a spiker (blood, FoC, Discord), on tainted flesh detail, abusing mobs high hit points with Spoil Victor or Grenth's Balance.--Drekmonger 19:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I thought blood spikes made warriors cry. My mistake. Done25 20:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Adding organization to these guides

After comparing all of the great ideas in the sections in these Profession guides, I've tried to bring together a single format for all of them to use. The information has not been changed, but in some cases it has been reorganized so that readers will know what to expect across all guides.

Because of this, many guides will have incomplete sections. I believe this is worth it to have the great sections cover all of the guides and have more complete organization.

I’m adding this explanation to all of the guides’ Talk pages so everyone can see it regardless of which guide they see first.--Declan 20:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Er....

Playing Style

Minion Master

trying to keep up a large army...Order of Undeath...er...wrong? -->78.16.161.138 19:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, they changed it in the August 7th update, Done25's updated the minion master section. -- Gordon Ecker 23:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Play style update

Would anyone object to a healer and protection role being added? (to include N/Rt +N/Mo) I know,generally sub-par to Mo/ and Rt/ but perhaps worthy of inclusion BlackBlood - talk 21:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't have any issue against it. I don't think N/Rt healers are sub-par, in fact, many will argue that they are overpowered. The only issue I'd have is to put a secondary-heavy in place of a primary guide. Also, I think N/Mo is not used much, am I wrong? -- Alaris 13:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

That was my thought too(forgot to note it),at best on a N/Rt the only skill used would be Signet of Lost Souls.Your right about N/Mo,nowhere near as common.As for sub-par,only in terms of attributes.12 resto is still very much potent (Edit)the difference between WoR @12 and @16 is only 16hp steal,probably actually worth more on a secondary Rt BlackBlood - talk 15:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

What the N/Rt lacks in attributes, he makes up for with added energy. N/Rt's are often preferred over primary monks or ritualists. -- Alaris 16:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Yup :) I run two N/Rt, both somewhat hybrids.BlackBlood - talk 19:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Soul Reaping

I went into a little more in-depth on Soul Reaping and added some things onto the Attributes list. Than 05:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

may it be useful to word the "soul reaping"-inroduction / extend it? "Killing more than 3 enemies within these 15 seconds will not grant any energy" or something like that... 62.159.90.138

Degeneration

Is anyone apposed to me posting a little bit on the Necro/Mesmer Secondary Profession about Health Degeneration builds?

elementalist

should not need a BiP.... if they do, your playing them wrong. Roflmaomgz 19:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Rewrite

Krschkr from PvX wiki asked me to link his rewritten version of this guide here: https://gwpvx.fandom.com/wiki/Guide:Necromancer
In his own words: "It concisely introduces the profession's unique mechanics, their impact on the gameplay and gives an overview about the derived common build types (using as few PvE-only skills as necessary to keep the guide better-suited for newer players)."
If someone thinks that the included ideas and/or format can be useful for a rewrite of this guide, feel free to use it. -- kazerniel (talk | contribs) 00:57, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Heh, give Krschkr a project and he will complete it and then some. Are we allowed to actually use material from that page or would he have to be the one to put it on GWWiki due to licensing issues? Soldier198-2 (talk) 03:23, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Would the inclusion of the "meat of the issue"; or key good exemplary content, without the exact format being also included, violate the licensing issue? I think not, but I am just me. Tikka LeFem talk (talk) 05:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

PvX wiki seems to be under the CC BY-NC-SA 2.5 license while GW wiki is under GFDL, of which Wikipedia says: "Although the two licenses work on similar copyleft principles, the GFDL is not compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license." So I think you would need to paraphrase. -- kazerniel (talk | contribs) 12:53, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Correct. The essence of what's expressed can be kept, but not the manner in which it's done. Greener (talk) 17:06, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

If it helps, Krschkr wrote a statement on the PvX talk page that he allows reuse of what he created. -- kazerniel (talk | contribs) 22:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Going off of this quote from Fandom, "Individual wikis may not use a license other than CC BY-SA unless it has been explicitly permitted by, or it was subject to a different license at the time it was acquired by, Fandom, Inc. Non-permitted uses of alternate licenses automatically default to CC BY-SA." it would appear that Krschkr is not allowed to opt out of the assigned license upon publishing their work on one of Fandom's sites. There may be an explicit agreement with PvX from when it was acquired to allow for a different licensing scheme, but that would need to be dug up. Additionally, it would have to be compatible with the GFDL we use, which I don't believe it ever was on PvX.

Krschkr's offer is a generous one, though, and the spirit of it is much appreciated. Greener (talk) 23:54, 2 December 2021 (UTC)