By looking at the RAW, the animate dead spell looks like an absolute beast. Apparently you can raise anything with a body, and can have up to four times your HD of summoned HD. In other words, a level 5 cleric can summon 20 HD. You can turn that into three undead dire crocs, 4 cyclopses, etc. It seems you can raise multiple creatures of a CR at or greater than your level.
Is this inherently broken? I've played a lot of necros, but never about level 4 so I could never get to use this spell. I'd imagine it as severely overpowered: Am I wrong?
Also, what's a better tactic? A few big bad zombies or a horde of smaller ones?
You have to take the campaign into account. You can't just march them into a city. If you leave them outside the city someone may find them. If the bad guys are necromancers your new buddies make turn on you. It is definitely not an insta-win spell.
I give my undead minions hats of disguise, or else tell them to bury themselves outside the city until called upon.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Necromancer wizards are pretty low tier in terms of awesome necromancers go. Clerics are pretty beastly since they get their stuff earlier and can do more with their stuff to boot.
Here's a few tips I can give.
Fast Zombies>Flaming Skeletons>Bloody Skeletons>Everything Else:
Fast zombies are ridiculous. But flaming skeletons are great if you want minions that do extra damage. Bloody skeletons are great if you want things that come back easily. If you venture outside of core you can find other really good options.
Desecrate your resurrection zone.
It means bigger returns on your spellcasting.
Bigger is better.
Hordes of zombies only work if you're a bad guy. Focus on quality, get thigns that have lots of templates piled on if the bad guy of the week was a half dragon frost giant praise the GM and appreciate your shiny new avatar of unrelenting death.
Necromancers are classy BBEGs because their lair can be huge and they don't necessarily need to control all of the undead in their lair. Just the ones that are in the immediate vicinity.
A lot of higher powered undead are the bane of players do to the possibility of doing ability damage or stacking on negative levels which can wear the party down. The low level types usually have DR/[weapon damage-type] making them troublesome at early levels. Along with immunity from con/fort save effects with mindless undead ignoring mind-effects makes them a little more troublesome.
Some undead are able to create spawn which can make things even more nasty.
Toss in the fact that a Necromancer usually to has his horde already out on hand without the need to summon creatures to control the battle field. Makes for pretty difficult fights.
Necromancy is filled with SoD and SoS spells so when those connect they can kill a PC quickly.
Cleric Necromancers do it better while Wizard Necromancers have the Arcane spell list as a good back-up to their arsenal.
I really like the concept of the necromancer with army, but the one time I tried it the results were iffy at best.
You can get several undead, but not enough to really swarm someone with numbers.
You can get a smaller number of more powerful undead, but they still seemed a lot weaker than the summon monster list.
They help out on the little prelude fights, but that is not where we normally have troubles.
If there are alot of mooks in the boss fight they can keep them busy, but a single area affect spell usually seemed to wipe them all out.
Yes, I know. I only tried it once. And I probably didn't do it perfectly. But I was disappointed enough that I didn't feel it was worth more effort.
They have some pretty decent SoS spells if you really crank your DC high. But I was trying to get the army, so I didn't have to get the DC as high, so I could put points in other abilities, have a guards to keep the bad guys away, and be less squishy.
What I got was a squad that didn't do much damage, died to fast to keep the bad guys away, and everything saved against my SoS spells.
I think a summoner would have worked much better.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't like having to recreate your undead, or have squishiness issues, go with Bloody. I know, fast zombies and flaming skeletons are better, but Bloody Skeletal undead keep all their natural attacks AND get back up when the fight is over.
Also, in regards to undead being overpowered, they really aren't. Many creatures lose LOTS of abilities, stats, and hit points when resurrected as undead. Heck, look at a troll (which, I'll admit, is an extreme example).
The base Troll has 6d8+36 HP, 16 AC, rend, and regeneration, not to mention decent Perception.
A skeletal Troll loses 36 HP, 2 AC, the Rend ability, and Regeneration, making him FAR squishier. Is he still useful? Sure, especially given that his Initiative is +5 higher than a normal troll. But at that point you're dealing with a 14 AC, 27 HP minion.
Now, making him a Bloody skeleton gives him 12 more HP, Channel Resistance, and helps to alleviate the problem of squishiness with Fast Healing and Deathless, but he's easy to hit and is far less perceptive.
Now, I say all that to say this: I would LOVE to have a Bloody Skeletal Troll. Is it weak? No way! This guy is a great little sidekick, and is essentially permanent (that is, until you find something better :P). Is it OP? I don't really think so.
... Bloody Skeletal undead keep all their natural attacks AND get back up when the fight is over...
When I tried it they didn't last long enough to do any good. The bad guys just included them and the rest of the party in an area affect spell. So it didn't even soak up a single action. The best you might be able to say is that it convinced the caster to use and AoA spell instead of a more effective targeted spell. But that is a pretty minor benefit for the build investment. So even though it could get back up after the fight it wasn't worth it.
I might try it again in the future sometime to see if it can be done better.
They are still wizards in the end. That being said I do not see them being more powerful or less powerful than a conjuror or an enchanter.
I really like the concept of the necromancer with army, but the one time I tried it the results were iffy at best.
You can get several undead, but not enough to really swarm someone with numbers.
You can get a smaller number of more powerful undead, but they still seemed a lot weaker than the summon monster list.They help out on the little prelude fights, but that is not where we normally have troubles.
If there are alot of mooks in the boss fight they can keep them busy, but a single area affect spell usually seemed to wipe them all out.Yes, I know. I only tried it once. And I probably didn't do it perfectly. But I was disappointed enough that I didn't feel it was worth more effort.
You might want to try the super genius games deathmage if you want an undead army. The corpsemage pale road allows you not only to create/control undead in the normal fashion, but you also get what amounts to a leadership feat worth of undead. So you get a cohort (who is an intelligent undead) and you get followers worth of undead to boot. At high levels with a good leadership score you are talking a pretty large number of undead. And you can also apply templates to both followers and cohorts like burning, bloody, fast or plague.
Yeah, but everyone (or at least me) thinks of the necromancer as similar to the master summoner.
The undead minions are the 'main' source of power.
I suppose it would have gone better if I built it as a wizard and oh yeah, I can also make a few of the sometimes kinda useful undead dudes.
Yeah, but everyone (or at least me) thinks of the necromancer as similar to the master summoner.
The undead minions are the 'main' source of power.
I suppose it would have gone better if I built it as a wizard and oh yeah, I can also make a few of the sometimes kinda useful undead dudes.
It sounds like you needed to get better quality meats to rip bones out of.
|
|
... Bloody Skeletal undead keep all their natural attacks AND get back up when the fight is over...When I tried it they didn't last long enough to do any good. The bad guys just included them and the rest of the party in an area affect spell. So it didn't even soak up a single action. The best you might be able to say is that it convinced the caster to use and AoA spell instead of a more effective targeted spell. But that is a pretty minor benefit for the build investment. So even though it could get back up after the fight it wasn't worth it.
I might try it again in the future sometime to see if it can be done better.
Emphasis mine.
There's your problem right there :P. Yeah, if you're fighting someone with tons of AoE, big groups of weak undead aren't gonna help. However, I have a hard time seeing Wizard drop a fireball at around level 5 that can kill off your 6d8+12 undead with a single blast, unless your DM felt like being mean :P
iirc: it was a cone of cold, we were mostly 6th and 7th level (I was 6th), and the 'they' were made from bugbears. They were the best thing we encountered prior to the big fight.
...You might want to try the super genius games deathmage if you want an undead army. The corpsemage pale road allows you not only to create/control undead in the normal fashion, but you also get what amounts to a leadership feat worth of undead...
I may have to check that out. Thanks.
|
|
iirc: it was a cone of cold, we were mostly 6th and 7th level (I was 6th), and the 'they' were made from bugbears. They were the best thing we encountered prior to the big fight.
I would actually say that that's the primary weakness of Necromancers: You can only work with what your DM gives you. The DM really determines the power of your abilities, and it's really easy to Neuter or Overpower the necromancer.
It definitely wasn't intentional on his part.
That was all set long before I made the character.
I am interested in an Necromancer as well for our annual "try as you wish" weekend (I normally GM).
I had the impression that, from a pure raising view, the Oracle of Bone (or even a special Cleric) was better than a Necromancer Wizard. Is that so or did I misread some of the abilities?
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I am interested in an Necromancer as well for our annual "try as you wish" weekend (I normally GM).
I had the impression that, from a pure raising view, the Oracle of Bone (or even a special Cleric) was better than a Necromancer Wizard. Is that so or did I misread some of the abilities?
I've actually found that the very best necromancer build is the Juju oracle from the Serpent's Skull AP. Juju
There are a few reasons:
1) Spirit vessels lets you use the animate dead and create undead spells WITHOUT THE EVIL DESCRIPTOR, which creates neutral undead creatures. In addition, any zombie or juju zombie that you make automatically gets MAX HP! Finally, you get to control 6HD of undead for each of your caster levels intstead of four!!!
2) You can still get Command Undead through the Undead Servitude revelation, to increase your total HD of undead.
3) The Undead Master feat still boosts your caster level by +4 when it comes to the maximum HD of undead you can create/control.
Adding all of these advantages up, a 10th-level Juju Oracle can create up to 84HD of undead with animate dead/create undead, all of which can have auto-maxed HP as long as they're some form of zombie, and you can control an additional 14 HD through Undead Servitude. When you qualify for it (my necro qualifies at level 15) you can also take Spell Specialization in animate dead to double ALL numerical bonuses from feats, which gives you an additional 24 HD with animate dead!
When you qualify for it (my necro qualifies at level 15) you can also take Spell Specialization in animate dead to double ALL numerical bonuses from feats, which gives you an additional 24 HD with animate dead!
I think you mean Spell Perfection, not Spell Specialization.
|
|
I play an Oracle of Bone in PFS. Its neat, and has some fun RP abilities, but as a reluctant power gamer I can say that realistically, this is easily the most mundane character I have ever played.
At level 9, he can raise undead. That means either skellys, or zombies. I can make them bloody skellys or fast zombies, and I usually choose zombies. I also took the feat "Skeleton Summoner" to add more versatility to my summons and now I can summon a skeleton champion if I need to. Its good, but its not GREAT I WIN!
The Oracle of Bone revelation Raise the Dead also is cool, but only for 4-5 round depending on your CHA modifier. This is the primary way to get a powerful undead in PFS.
I am hamstrung by the limitations the Society play puts on me...I can't just come into the setting already having a high powered zombie, I have to raise them as we go. Since most fights are lower level mooks, and since the skeleton and the zombie templates specifically say that the bad guys lose all class levels, they are essentially 1HD whatevers. Even if we find a cool monster along the way, most of the time they lose their cool abilities for those of the skeleton or zombies I summon. Usually at the boss fight, and one other time during the game session (Abundant Revelations: Raise Dead) I just summon a 9HD fast Zombie, but it only gets 2 slams at +11 for 1d6+7 each...which I find to be a bit underwhelming. Still, they are a HP sink for the bad guy, they can usually ill afford to ignore it, and it helps to set up flanks/control the battlefield so it IS helpful.
All in all, its a great fun character to play. Mostly I try to control the undead we meet in a session, and then spam negative energy attacks, which is hardly EVER able to be resisted and usually overcomes most DR. Its fun, and a great character...but in terms of raw power it is very underwhelming. Unless the scenario has undead in it. If thats the case, I channel and control them, then turn them against the others in the scenario, and then I win.
Its a lot like most necromancy spells now that i think on it...they either make me win, or make me suck.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I play an Oracle of Bone in PFS. Its neat, and has some fun RP abilities, but as a reluctant power gamer I can say that realistically, this is easily the most mundane character I have ever played.
At level 9, he can raise undead. That means either skellys, or zombies. I can make them bloody skellys or fast zombies, and I usually choose zombies. I also took the feat "Skeleton Summoner" to add more versatility to my summons and now I can summon a skeleton champion if I need to. Its good, but its not GREAT I WIN!
The Oracle of Bone revelation Raise the Dead also is cool, but only for 4-5 round depending on your CHA modifier. This is the primary way to get a powerful undead in PFS.
I am hamstrung by the limitations the Society play puts on me...I can't just come into the setting already having a high powered zombie, I have to raise them as we go. Since most fights are lower level mooks, and since the skeleton and the zombie templates specifically say that the bad guys lose all class levels, they are essentially 1HD whatevers. Even if we find a cool monster along the way, most of the time they lose their cool abilities for those of the skeleton or zombies I summon. Usually at the boss fight, and one other time during the game session (Abundant Revelations: Raise Dead) I just summon a 9HD fast Zombie, but it only gets 2 slams at +11 for 1d6+7 each...which I find to be a bit underwhelming. Still, they are a HP sink for the bad guy, they can usually ill afford to ignore it, and it helps to set up flanks/control the battlefield so it IS helpful.
All in all, its a great fun character to play. Mostly I try to control the undead we meet in a session, and then spam negative energy attacks, which is hardly EVER able to be resisted and usually overcomes most DR. Its fun, and a great character...but in terms of raw power it is very underwhelming. Unless the scenario has undead in it. If thats the case, I channel and control them, then turn them against the others in the scenario, and then I win. ...
@Ravingdork - Sorry, yeah I meant Spell Perfection
@Bomanz - Yeah, PFS is not good to Necros. In a home game, a necromancer can straight up destroy, but PFS's limitations on carrying bodies around with you really hurts.
Necromancers come in two types.
Type I necromancers have lots of undead minions (or one big undead minion). For all the reasons outlined above, this is difficult for PCs to pull off, and evil clerics -- or clerics of evil gods -- who can arrange to desecrate areas, have negative energy channelling, etc., are probably going to be better at it than wizards.
Type II necromancers don't worry about undead: they just snuff out your soul directly. They're _very_ good debuffers, and masters of save-or-suck spells. Wizards are very good at this, and loads of fun.
I look at Necromancers in this way.
The book only says that I can control 4X my hit die in undead, I can create as many as I want. If I want to take down a city all I have to do is animate them. The uncontrolled undead will do the work for me as long as I use the level 1 spell invisibility to undead, or some sort of "Don't hit me." equivalent.
The book only says that I can control 4X my hit die in undead, I can create as many as I want. If I want to take down a city all I have to do is animate them. The uncontrolled undead will do the work for me as long as I use the level 1 spell invisibility to undead, or some sort of "Don't hit me." equivalent.
Or keep command undead memorized so you can repurpose one of the currently uncontrolled ones...
Bloody Flaming Skeletons.
Mob target, use assist other on a grapple and either way its a rattling, slimy, portable, self-recharging 'sphere of flame' which sometimes immobilises the target.
How is this innefective? I made a GM go with fire-immune mobs after three renditions of this.
It is effective.... trust me....
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Bloody Flaming Skeletons.
Mob target, use assist other on a grapple and either way its a rattling, slimy, portable, self-recharging 'sphere of flame' which sometimes immobilises the target.
How is this innefective? I made a GM go with fire-immune mobs after three renditions of this.
It is effective.... trust me....
The issue with this is that mindless undead just can't be controlled that well. You can't tell a bloody flaming skeleton "go grapple with that guy." They can only understand EXTREMELY simple commands. "Attack", "Come here", "Stand still", "Run away".
Here is the relevant line from the command undead spell, which seems to be the basis for how you control any undead you create:" When you control a mindless being, you can communicate only basic commands, such as "come here," "go there," "fight," "stand still," and so on. Nonintelligent undead won't resist suicidal or obviously harmful orders."
Of course, intelligent undead are a completely different ballgame.
So, sorry to say, you can't have a "rattling, slimy, portable, self-recharging 'sphere of flame' which sometimes immobilises the target", because they wouldn't understand your commands. The best you could do is tell them all to attack the same person.
Also - Lingering Persistent Suffocation FTW.
The issue with this is that mindless undead just can't be controlled that well. You can't tell a bloody flaming skeleton "go grapple with that guy." They can only understand EXTREMELY simple commands. "Attack", "Come here", "Stand still", "Run away".Bloody Flaming Skeletons.
Mob target, use assist other on a grapple and either way its a rattling, slimy, portable, self-recharging 'sphere of flame' which sometimes immobilises the target.
How is this innefective? I made a GM go with fire-immune mobs after three renditions of this.
It is effective.... trust me....
I disagree that "tackle that guy" isn't a simple command (at least no more or less than "attack that guy").
Not anymore than "hold that guy down" at least.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Not anymore than "hold that guy down" at least.
I agree, "tackle that guy" might work, but you're not going to get the benefit of assisting each other, each one is gonna work independently to grapple/tackle. Your DM could rule that they're assisting each other without knowing that they are, but I wouldn't rule that way.
Not anymore than "hold that guy down" at least.I agree, "tackle that guy" might work, but you're not going to get the benefit of assisting each other, each one is gonna work independently to grapple/tackle. Your DM could rule that they're assisting each other without knowing that they are, but I wouldn't rule that way.
A pile of dudes jumping on top of you are helping eachother to hold you down whether they know it or not.
|
When it comes to a lot of minions, remember that a minion can grapple and the other nearby minions can assist that grapple attack. Suddenly, being surrounded by pitsy minions grabbing and clawing at you is as terrifying as it should be.
Literally vanishing under a horde of zombie flesh or bloody skeltons as you are grappled and pinned and clawed to death in the pile-on is creepy Romeroesque awesomeness. And as all of this horror is taking place, the Necromancer is hitting you with Spectral Hand enabled touch spells from range and Enervation rays too; so yes, it can be quite enough to ruin your entire 15 minute adventuring day!
iirc: it was a cone of cold, we were mostly 6th and 7th level (I was 6th), and the 'they' were made from bugbears. They were the best thing we encountered prior to the big fight.
Wait... aren't most types of skeleton immune to cold damage?
iirc: it was a cone of cold, we were mostly 6th and 7th level (I was 6th), and the 'they' were made from bugbears. They were the best thing we encountered prior to the big fight.Wait... aren't most types of skeleton immune to cold damage?
I don't remember for certain, but I think it was an elementalist using that ability to switch it to acid damage. Or something like that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As has been pointed out - an assisted grapple is entirely feasibly represented by my undead simply dogpiling and grappling.
Rules-lawyer arguements about 'you can't give a mindless undead a command to grapple' is anally retentive and assumes that simple is 'one-word', which, of course, is not supported by the rules anywhere....
Quote from Animate Dead spell;
"The undead can be made to follow you, or they can be made to remain in an area and attack any creature (or just a specific kind of creature)".
It does not say 'simple attack'.
Quote from Skeleton entry in Bestiary I
"While most skeletons are mindless automatons, they still possess an evil cunning imparted to them by their animating force—a cunning that allows them to wield weapons and wear armor."
.... and of course they have a CMB of +2, which they would not have were they not capable of grappling....
So - they can attack targets as directed, have an evil cunning and can grapple.
So enough with the 'they can't assist in a grapple' nonesense....
I wouldn't call it nonsense. I can see it reasoned either way.
Having "an evil cunning ... that allows them to wield weapons" is not necessarily the same thing as intelligent enough to cooperate tactically to assist with grappling. They are less intelligent than animals and I've neer seen anyone say most animals can use assist to grapple.
On the other hand;
I can also see the side that says assisting in a grapple (mechanic) can be represented by a dogpile (description).
I would have no heartburn if my GM ruled either way. I'm not sure what I would do as a GM since none of my players ever seem to use combat maneuvers if ther is any possible way to avoid it. Even if they 'know' it is a better choice, they still won't do it.
I wouldn't call it nonsense. I can see it reasoned either way.
Having "an evil cunning ... that allows them to wield weapons" is not necessarily the same thing as intelligent enough to cooperate tactically to assist with grappling. They are less intelligent than animals and I've neer seen anyone say most animals can use assist to grapple.
On the other hand;
I can also see the side that says assisting in a grapple (mechanic) can be represented by a dogpile (description).
I would have no heartburn if my GM ruled either way. I'm not sure what I would do as a GM since none of my players ever seem to use combat maneuvers if ther is any possible way to avoid it. Even if they 'know' it is a better choice, they still won't do it.
An arguement is only reasoned if it has evidence to support it.
My arguement has the existence of a CMB, the description of cunning and the fact they can be commanded to attack - without stated restrictions on how (within the limits of their stat block).
The opposing arguement has no such evidence of validity - it is an unsupported opinion based on a loose and personal interpretation of the word 'mindless'.
Controllers/Summoners have never really been that impressive to me, just by fact that when you animate something as a skeleton/zombie, it looses pretty much everything that makes it awesome in the first place. Class levels, special attacks, etc. The more powerful undead are much better but are also much harder to control (Good will save and high charisma makes losing control of your ghost/vampire/devourer a very real possibility).
Unfortunately, divine casters make the best summoners/controllers but they also lack the most important spell for when you do inevitably lose control of your power-house (Control Undead is high level and Sor/Wiz only!) :(
That said, SoS/SoD Necros are incredibly powerful. You dabble in undead but ultimately they're just a distraction to keep the enemy busy while you unleash SoD after SoD at them. Wizards are the best here, and only better than Sorcerers due to the School Specialization being quite superior to the Undead Bloodline.
Just my 2cp.
... An arguement is only reasoned if it has evidence to support it...
Simply not true. There is an entire field (philosophy) which is essentially based on reasoned argument without evidence. In fact alot of people would say that reasoned argument is impossible if there is clear evidence. Argument is only necessary when the evidence is insufficient or unclear. It is true that some people won't accept an opposing viewpoint if it doesn't have evidence.
... My arguement has the existence of a CMB, the description of cunning and the fact they can be commanded to attack - without stated restrictions on how (within the limits of their stat block) ...
Existence of a stat block does not necessarily mean that it can be used in any possible feasible combination. Unless you interpret it that way. Then it can be said to imply any possible use.
... The opposing arguement has no such evidence of validity - it is an unsupported opinion based on a loose and personal interpretation of the word 'mindless'.
Their point is implied restriction. Which it is very easy to show - "mindless". There use of the word mindless is no worse than your use of the phrase "evil cunning."
My point was that it can easily be interpreted either way. Therefore it would not fit most peoples definition of nonsense.
-----------------------------------------------------
Personally, I am closer to your interpritation than only simple attacks are allowed. I have no problem with an order to your horde to "grab that dude." If by dogpile you mean 12 skeletons are using 'assist other, flanking, tactical positioning, held actions, etc...' to improve the odds of the closest 4 on their grapple actions (this is what many people on these boards seem to mean by a dogpile), well then I start to have issues. I am not sure 'mindless' even with 'evil cunning' allows that kind of planning and cooperation. I'm not yet sure if I would say yes or no, but I'm leaning toward no.
I will also say I think the 'simple attack' commands only is a leftover from 3.x DnD. I believe everyone held to that back then.
... An arguement is only reasoned if it has evidence to support it...Simply not true. There is an entire field (philosophy) which is essentially based on reasoned argument without evidence. In fact alot of people would say that reasoned argument is impossible if there is clear evidence. Argument is only necessary when the evidence is insufficient or unclear.
You are referring to the 'inductive reasoning' used in philosophy. This however is based on observations - abstracted ones true, but evidence nevertheless.
I didn't not claim that evidence was required purely for 'deductive reasoning' - which you have incorrectly assumed....
I've never played a Necromancer and am curious about 1 thing. How do you guys get around the problem of having a cleric/oracle/paladin in your party that wants to spam positive channeling to keep the party alive in tough fights? Isn't this standard tactic going to make a mess of your undead minions?