Necromancer, Blood Mage or Both?

Would just mention that according to one of the writers technically Necromancy is a type of blood magic. That was also the implication in DA2, that it was an even more evil branch of blood magic, not just with respect to Quentin but also when dealing with the run away mages in Act 1.   "They're raising the bloody dead!", said Anders, horrified and it was implied this was done through blood magic. Then along came Dorian, who condemns blood magic as something good mages only do as a last resort but is a Necromancer. I think it is probably more a case that like blood magic, necromancy can be misused, which is what I assume the Mortalitasi have always maintained, which is how they have got away with using it under the noses of the Chantry for so long.

In terms of class mechanics, necromancy would appear easier to accommodate without upsetting friends (except spirits like Cole) because you are using the dead rather than the living to improve your magic. If they restored blood magic as a class but let it be regarded in a neutral light, as Solas did and Merrill also argued, so the morality of its use depended entirely upon the person using it, then I think I would prefer it to having necromancy back. However, I think they are likely to opt for necromancy being the neutral discipline and will be reserving blood magic purely for our enemies to use. I wouldn't mind this so long as we start getting some decent blood mage opponents again, particularly since we are heading to Tevinter. The blood mages in DA2 were dangerous; the Tevinter mages in DAI were largely pathetic but then they weren't blood mages but spellbinders, which again seemed to be something to do with manipulating spirits.