NorrKnekten's page

Honestly I feel like PF2e could do with divorcing spell mechanics from the class chassis entirely and let players choose whether they are a Studied/Prepared, Repertoire/Spontaneous, Full List/Prepared caster along with what the key ability (Int, Wis, Cha) is.

But that might be just a little too much for some people potentially, especially newer players.

It also seems like that would put constraints on future class design, For example if spiritualist would be reintroduced from 1e as that was pretty much a spontanious caster with wisdom as key attribute.

Psychic already kinda doesn't follow the Cha = spontanious as they can be Int too.

Why would a Necromancer ever prepare Soothe if they have access to Heal (or Harm to heal their undead thralls) ?

I really feel this would be stepping on the Divine casters' territory way too much.

I agree, I don't think heal/harm belongs in the occult spell-list. But with how Mastery of Life and Death is written there just isnt a way for a necromancer to deal vitality damage outside of multi-classing.

It is described as a class that manipulate Vitality and Void in equal measure but within the playtest its purely Void converted into Vitality.
Could be a result of future proofing on Paizo's part or they are looking into injecting more vitality spells into the occult spell-list. They might even have feats for vitality abilities/Focus spells that didnt make it into playtest.

why? Why should death makes gain access to healing? That doesn't line up with the vibe of the class or pop culture necromancy at all

Because the point is Mastery of *Life* and Death, Heal was in the necromancy school after all.

TBT I feel it is not the same flavor / theme.

The Necromancer described here is all about creating and using undead as means to their end.

Becoming one feels off.

Im going to be honest, This Necromancer looks more about bone and flesh puppets than actual undead. I feel this is purposeful in order to make "Good" Necromancers viable.

Im going to be honest; I dont think an undead companion fits well into the PC Necromancer theme or gameplay.

With the theme; undead companions are unholy creations when gained from any other source and thus with paizo having stayed clear of the usual unholy soultrapping and corpse morphing. Having instead gone for creating bone, flesh and spirit from smaller pieces.

Mechanically; It doesnt play well with the minions they already aim to create each round. Sure there could be something like a focus spell that creates the equivalent of a Magnificent Mount

Squiggit wrote:

but I have to agree with some above comments that the spellbook penalty doesn't really feel deserved on any PF2 caster.

It's a legacy issue which should have been done away with in the remaster. The idea that specifically Int based casters need additional limitations when Int does nothing special for them really, is just one of these things Paizo refuses to let go of.

Mostly the inclusion of a spellbook or spell-repository feature has been made in order to balance classes with easy access to swapping out prepared spells after daily prep has already been made.

Wizard has an entire thesis about this.
Witch has the various rite feats and the knife for a free wand per day.
Magus has standby spell.

Technically druids and clerics can do this too but its mostly related to summon animal or in relation to the Healing Font being used for other restorative spells.

Having access to the entire list and the ability to swap prepared spells out for any other spell is a bit much and I believe Necromancer will see feats like these too.

Why not make the Necromancer like Psychic, Int or Cha with Sub-class choices or maybe it be a secondary sub-class like the sub-conscious mind and conscious mind of Psychic, maybe we make the Necromancer the first Caster to use Int, Wis or Cha based on their choice? With the ability to steal spells from other Traditions, now that be cool wouldn't it?

There is absolutely space for such a class, Just not sure if Necromancer is the correct choice for it.

Had it been the Arcanist class from first edition then yes,it was essentially a meld between Sorc and Wiz. then I could've probably seen it

I think Paizo overall just want to step away from the Necromancer traditionally being just a wizard with a fascination of the undead.

Considering that casters of any tradition typically were called Necromancers just because they happened to specialize in that school.

You can certainly have the arcane wizards of necromantic studies in Geb.
You can have Urgathoa cultists.
You can have Spore druids creating Mycoguardians a la The last of Us.

All of them technically could be called necromancers.
But the Necromancer class seems to beckon flesh, bone and spirit.
They create skeletons from shards of bone, Flesh from droplets of blood and create spiritual essence.

To me it seems the flavor is meant to be "Ethical Necromancy" since it lacks a rarity trait like that we saw with Exemplar.

Using their magic to grow Thralls from fragments rather than using actual corpses.

EDIT:
...This is just lab-grown necromancy isnt it?....
welp, time to make a Kholo Necromancer who uses the bone of their ancestor to create skeletal hyenas.

NorrKnekten wrote:

There is a lich archetype so creating such abilities just isnt a neccesity.

But granted I would love for Necromancer to be able to decide if they are treated as alive or undead and would love to see a featchain for that to either increase the frequency or duration such a feat would have.

I think there is a huge difference between a feat like Bloodline Mutation and a full rare archetype. How many GMs do you think will allow you to take the Lich archetype compared to playing as an undead sorcerer? Additionally, relying on archetypes to fulfill certain roles is a bad idea.

Oh no, I am very well aware you werent arguing about adding a feat that made the Necromancer undead. Bloodline mutation doesn't do it either despite adding the trait to you. Sorcerers with the Undead Bloodline are still treated as a living creature for every single effect outside Heal/Harm when affected by their focus spell.

My point is that just slapping on the undead trait and some void resistance is kinda boring for a lvl 20 feat. However being able to temporarily extend the Mastery of Life and Death feature to a defensive feature in regards to if they are treated as living or undead is really on theme. Which can then later become a permanent thing if done trough a feat-chain.

I feel like we want the same thing but I just really hate the idea using the design space for a feat to just slap a non-functioning trait on a character.

As it stands right now... true undeath is and should be rare just as unholy character options overall are uncommon.

There is a lich archetype so creating such abilities just isnt a neccesity.

But granted I would love for Necromancer to be able to decide if they are treated as alive or undead and would love to see a featchain for that to either increase the frequency or duration such a feat would have.

A dirge is typically a written text meant to comemorate the dead.

Instead of adding more pages to a spellbook they add more verses to the text, Their spells are cast by chanting these verses which in Necromancer Spellcasting is described as lamentations, Requiems and other rites for the dead.

They memorize these verses just as a wizard memorizes their prepared spells.

Pretty much all prepared caster had that text removed as it was moved into learn a spell, With exception of Witch since their repository is both unique and has additional features compared to the normal spellbook, including how spells are learned.

Pipefox papershredder noises.