I like random spell mishaps. Not just humorous ones, but ones that match the intended tone of the scene (such as horror, high adventure, pulp action, etc). I like magic that doesn't behave like a set of empirical scientific rules, but is instead a mysterious, barely-controlled, and chimerical thing, to be mastered only by the brave, clever and slightly foolhardy.
A lot of the "why are there still wells and tinkers around" logic comes from extremely modern concepts of economies of scale and globalistic thought- something that has really come into its own with the massive amount of easily accessible information we now have. Back in the day, yes, creating water in a desert would be an amazingly valuable ability for anyone to have. But it's still a small caste of people who can do that, and they won't always want to. Very likely after a few weeks, they'll dig the entire well themselves to stop having to cast the same thing all the time- if other people didn't dig some anyway. Any day the caster gets sick, goes on vacation, gets pouty from a huge argument or commits a crime and gets himself hung, the community depending on him would similarly die. Independence, superstition, stubborn adherence to tradition or just plain irrational dislike for the people using the magic could all factor into not adopting a totally magical economy despite the obvious benefits. There are huge advantages to using a single spoken language, a single operating system, a single programming language, and a single monetary system, but I'm pretty sure we won't see that day without world domination creating it. That's a little bigger in scope than free cantrips (which I like), but I really wish I could illustrate to people how a certain level of inefficiency can make a world more believable, not less.
I personally think that Disable Device should logically include the ability to craft traps already, since if you know how to dismantle a trap, you should be able to make one. If I could assemble everything I can disassemble, I would get paid a whole lot more than I do. Or maybe Doctors would just get paid a lot less. *shrug* I'm fine with either happening.
"Comrade, your valor is impressive as always! However, your poor discretion is going to lose us the war for the want of a battle. Not all foes are equal, and that mindless stack of bones cannot appreciate your bravery and skill. There was no reason to give it the glory of your injuries. I insist you take our search for the more worthy foe seriously- we need not test my patron for the virtue of patience." There, a good in-character way to gently scold.
Actually the "getting XP for killing things" came from 2.0 long before WOW. Don't blame this on MMO's. First XP was when you got loot back in 1.0. 2.0 you got it for killing things. It wasn't until 3.5 when the idea of bypassing encounters in other ways got you xp for them (I believe the exact section of it can be found on page 35 or so of the book of exalted deeds). My intro box adventure to AD&D offered up DMs the advice to give players as much XP or more for bypassing encounters through cleverness instead of just fighting them, so that idea isn't a 3.X thing. I can't say for certain at the moment, but I'm pretty sure the terminology has always been "defeat" the encounters or foes, which is slightly more inclusive (and occasionally challenging) than "kill."
Stop responding to their system mastery. If you want to induce a different behavior, stop incentivising the unwanted one and reward the wanted one. Don't reward roleplaying with dry XP or gold awards. That's re-engaging rules use and putting the focus back in the meta-game. Reward roleplaying with success in a broader sense- more attention at the table, more enthusiasm in your reactions and expressions, allies they can call on, ties to in-game organizations, information on something from their backstory. Maybe commission a picture of the character doing something cool that wasn't a routine use of the rules (emphasize something they did that was important to the character, not something generic to a dungeon crawl, like beating a tough but nondescript challenge). Pay more and better attention to the people who are doing the things you want and make sure it pays off from their perspective. This doesn't mean actively punishing the others, but it does mean making it obvious that they are missing out by not engaging in the same behavior, inviting them to do it, and then rewarding them when they do. Things I do that cut down on narrative staleness: During the game, I ask for detail about how they are doing things. Not drawing out whole paragraphs, but I don't let them get by with "I attack" or "I use diplomacy." They always have to frame what they are doing clearly in the game world. If their description tags something unique about the narrative situation that gives them a bonus, I tell them that and give a bit of flourish to the result. They'll pay more attention to the situation and their in-game surroundings, and from there it's a short jump to getting emotionally invested in the story. When prepping backstory, I ask people to come up with two things I can use as mini-quests for their specific character, as well as at least one ally and one enemy they know of. This gives me more material for adventures, and gives them a sense of shaping the world as it relates to them. (The ally usually was either a planned cohort or a potential backup character, but that still made them think about continuity, which is also important.) I stopped running a "killer" game. This is probably important for players of the early editions- if they see the game as likely to kill off their character, they can't work up the will to make a detailed and nuanced concept. There isn't a point. For the level of development you are asking for, you need a sense of continuity and that your investment will pay off. The "ally" approach above helps with this a little, but you do need to find ways to preserve the risk in the game without making investing in character concepts pointless. A lot of old-school gamers thrive on the thrill of risk and equate it to death- cultivate other sources of failure and make those just as thrilling. I offered advice on how to tighten up concept-driven character stats. When people approached their characters from a narrative angle, I showed them what rules they could use to represent those things best in the system. Seems contradictory, but this brought our lines of thought closer together, and showed them that thinking story-first doesn't equate to being "inefficient," which made them less averse to the idea. It also gave me ideas on what kinds of scenarios and events could showcase their abilities, meaning that they ended up more successful in the game afterwards for having done so. It also acts as "attention reinforcement."
For reference I run AP's. And tactics? That would require the dragon to last more than one round. Can't speak to APs, as I haven't run any. Don't know how much leeway you have in modifying them to make the dragon an acceptable challenge, or even more believable. As for combat challenges, I can only suggest things I've done. Abuse terrain horribly. Dragon lairs are specifically chosen and shaped to be safe places for the dragon and their hoard. The area should lend itself to the dragon's favored combat style, whatever that is. For example, one with a burrow speed would likely have claustrophobic chambers isolated from each other by long stretches of solid dirt pack, some of which could be collapsed with little effort. Difficult terrain and cover would be plentiful, since attackers have a hard time arranging defensively, can't close in effectively, and take a big hit to ranged attacks (cover is effective against ranged touch), while the dragon ignores most of the penalties by attacking sandworm style. Pop in, devastate, pop out- it's like Spring Attack, only horrible. A flying dragon might make a large chamber, devoid of useful cover- say, a chasm with bridges spanning it- so it can swoop about under the cover of illusion spells and harry the party with flyby attacks, while most of them are trapped on a small space with little mobility to work with. It is immune to paralysis and sleep (being a Dragon), so it would take some skill to knock it out of the sky (and an item of Feather Fall would give it more time to recover). It might even place some cover with specialized traps on it, to lure in flying attackers. Traps of Dispel Magic on said cover have the potential to knock down attackers relying on spells of flight. Standing water is another terrain modification useful to most dragons. Many of them can effectively ignore it, while knee-deep or hip-deep water can seriously limit party mobility without providing much in the way of protection to them. Depending on how you have electricity interact with water, lightning breath weapons and attack magics can become even harder to avoid when the party is hindered like that. If the party is using spells to move normally or exit the water (say, Freedom of Movement or Spider Climb), those are spell slots or scrolls not doing other horrible things to the dragon (which can also be dispelled early on by clever dragons or their minions anticipating such things). As others point out, though, well-considered minions are orders of magnitude more helpful. A dragon might have a few draconic minions specifically to complicate terrain effects, strip off magic defenses, or act as damaging distractions. Minions placed in the area around their lair can scout potential invaders, not only providing warnings, but also give some specific details about their attack method that could affect tactics (one has a dragonbane greataxe, one is carrying a holy symbol of X deity, they arrived by using magic to fly up the mountain, etc).
But tactics can be countered with other tactics. If the GM knows the system, he can play his NPCs the same way. I had assumed you were recommending this crib sheet of guideline numbers for new GMs. If not, I'm not sure how much help it would really be over reading a Character Optimization guide and lowering the numbers 10-30%. Any veteran GM capable of countering tactics with tactics probably has enough of a grip on the system to determine when a party is working "at efficiency" or not. For new GMs, a numbers sheet strikes me as likely to lull them into a false sense of security that the players are up for a given CR of challenge- and then the CR system's shortcomings reveal themselves, such as a Golem against a group of spellcasters, or a flying enemy against a melee- oriented party. These two ideas though- character "target numbers" and monster "tactics tags"- sound like really good fan projects for people on this board. People are already rating spell choices for different classes and common adventuring equipment, and others have converted monsters into playable classes. Why not tag monsters with the various merits and flaws people have noticed?
I would think so...its 1 damage with save for half... Which all applies to poisoned daggers thrown by a Rogue, arrows shot by a Ranger, scatterguns fired by Gunslingers, throwing & returning swords tossed by a fighter- but Alchemists? Heck no. Their items deal minimum energy damage to a small area, what are you thinking? The Mook's Union will have our pensions in a vice! And can you even begin to conceive of the scenery damage? I shudder to think of what the Association of Dungeon Engineers and League of Druidic Laborers will demand in response. And the picket lines will smell terrible.
People seem to want to leave the Fighter and Rogue as broad-concept classes that you can use to make almost anything you want. I think that in D20, this hurts it in the long run, since that means it doesn't get the same abilities that more focused classes do to help them "do their job" in the long haul. Feats can be taken by "narrow focus" classes too, so they don't help the broad-concept ones stand out, and if a feat is needed to make a basic feature of the class work most of the time (say, Sneak Attacking in the dark) then that is one feat that isn't making it a more unique character or helping make it as legendary as the focused classes in the later levels. Rogues need to stop trying to be everything to everybody, "declare their major" and graduate with the rest of the class. They don't have to be one trick ponies, but they shouldn't be the 7-year Liberal Arts degree in the resume pool for a character concept. A lot of people have really good design ideas. I have a few that are basic repeats, but I put forward some guidelines that might help shape a lasting Rogue class: (1) Decide what you want the Rogue's job to be. He needs to be able to do that no matter who else is in the party, or if they are busy. (It is all right to benefit from having a compatible class type available, but it shouldn't be necessary for you to work at full efficiency) (2) His primary ability should advance without having to spend character creation resources on it. (It is fine if it can be made better with them- Alchemists and Barbarians run off of this principle. You should not have to be earmarking 80% of your skill points, feats and Tricks to do your job- and no one should suffer for taking skills or feats that make sense for the given story) (3) His abilities should make sense when taken as a whole and never invalidate one another. (It is one thing to have an ability ready in case of a planning failure of another- say, an Alchemist can poison a weapon in case he can't Bomb or Feral Mutagen something. Sneak Attack and hiding in darkness require feats to actually work together, which doesn't make sense and goes back to needing character creation resources)
If you have a concept for a character- something in mind for who they are, where they came from and what they do- you drape appropriate mechanics over that, so they can interact with the rest of the game world in a meaningful, consistent way. Hopefully your resulting character isn't short any abilities, but most gamers have learned to live with that- they'll pick them up later in the career. If you have extra abilities, you ignore them, or explain them in a way that makes sense for your concept. This can even lead to organic character growth, which everyone agrees is a good thing. The Rogue is one such set of mechanics. The unsatisfying thing is- most concepts that the Rogue satisfies are now done by other classes just as well. The only real exceptions are ones that specifically exclude the alternatives, and are usually made with the (sub)conscious decision to fit the concept to the class, not fit the class to the concept. If you want to play someone street-savvy who can pick pockets or locks, notice potential marks, climb to second story shops, sweet-talk a merchant into a discount and shiv a guy in a dark alley really well? Urban Ranger can do that! As a bonus, it keeps up more nicely at higher levels. Oh, you didn't want to cast spells? Well, who's making you cast spells as an Urban Ranger? Sure, you get them, but no one can make you cast them. Didn't want an animal companion? Never call one. Or, take the bond with your party, and explain it as "gang tactics" or an exceptional ability to plan heists. Everyone loves it when a plan comes together. Some people have a mental short-circuit telling them that the Rogue class has some sort of trademark or monopoly on the in-game titles of Swashbuckler, Scoundrel, Rake, Thief, Thug, or the adjective "Dashing." This simply isn't true, but they will fight to preserve their perceptions. Using a title to describe a character or concept has no bearing on the actual class you are using as a vehicle for your persona. The only reason not to do so is that some of these words have become actual Archetypes, and will confuse people who don't know what your mechanical class is (and therefore won't know what to expect of your capabilities). This is a truly unfortunate side effect of using a class-based game.
Assimilated Ability needs some revision. Most abilities are linked to the class level of the class the ability belongs to (Sneak Attack is an example), they aren't "staged." Technically, you have no levels in the requisite class, so no matter how many times you select it, you would get no bonus (especially for things like Nature Bond, Eidolon and Arcane Pool, which you select once and it improves the rest of your levels- you can't take it again, as it isn't "staged"). If you treat the ability as being dependent on your Adventurer level (or even any fraction of it), then it can become unbalanced depending on how many items you can take and stack. If the abilities aren't advancing unless you actually take Assimilated Ability for ever level, then it ends up no different than simple multiclassing, which you created this class to avoid. Dabbler needs to specify if spellcasting is spontaneous or prepared, and how spells are refreshed (rest for 8 hours, or pray at a specific time in a day). Caster level and requisite attribute are undefined, so Save DCs are up in the air. While it mentions you need to "advance" each magic type's progression separately, there is no actual progression- I could take Dabbler at 12th level and get 2 4th level spells and some cantrips and orisons (do I only get one variety per selection, as if it were "Arcane Dabbler" and "Divine Dabbler"?). If it was intended to build on previous selections and not grant high-level spells in absence of lower-level ones, that isn't there. Also, how do their spells interact with Arcane Spell Failure? It's not inherently bad or unbalanced, just incomplete right now. Perceptive is weaker and more restricted than simply taking Extra Feat for Skill Focus: Perception or Alertness. Only benefit to it is that it would stack with them if you had them already. Uncanny Defense could simply be listed as a Dodge bonus, which stacks with itself and meets all of the given conditions. Unique Ability should not ignore component costs- Even at once per day and at 18th level+, a free Wish 1/per day is not a good idea. As I was told once- spells with costly components are the ones you shouldn't be casting often. Overall impression is that Assimilated Ability, Dabbler and Unique Ability are really, really powerful compared to all of the other Talents- given the wide variety of class ability and archetypes to choose from, they pretty much carry the Talents list by themselves. Assimilated Ability needs some re-thinking, Dabbler probably ought to be finished. Overall, it's not a bad idea for a class, but it really looks like you are trying to use a "design-a-class" system that might be done better with a point-buy approach of some sort, or just some Player/GM eyeballing. Arcane Pool is not equal to Nature Sense, and Assimilated Ability does not differentiate that.
However, all flexible weapons require coordination to use in the real world over Strength so they should all be usable with Finesse. Perhaps, they should even require Finesse. In the real world, Strength aids your ability to finesse weapons as well. Stronger muscles make any object you hold easier to maneuver, quicker to move, and quicker to recover or ready. However, most gamers seem to have some sort of aversion to acknowledging the role of strength and practiced skill with regards to graceful varieties of combat, and simply want to use inherent coordination alone.
Paladins, despite being a paragon of Good and Law, can't use knockout toxins on their weapons to end fights quicker and less painfully. They can't even allow an Alchemist or Rogue follower to do the same for them, for some reason. @ Neo2151- Step 1: lose Paladin powers. Step 2: retrain as Inquisitor. Step 3: be a hero.
Spells must be in the main book as you have classes that need them. what you do not need is 150+ spells in the book however.I don't see anything wrong with having spells in a separate book. Much easier to reference. New player, pretty young. Has no money and no job. Gets book as a gift from well-meaning but clueless relatives. Wants to play a wizard. Can't until someone else buys the book from them. Can't show up at a game with a statted-up magical character because they don't have spell selection, and don't know what spells do. The only chance they will get to read said spells is during play time, slowing the game down, unless someone loans them said book. Honestly, one of the best things Pathfinder ever did was consolidate two $30-$50 books into one $40-$50 book. Only downside to it is that the sheer weight is ripping its binding apart, and it could use a ton of cross-referencing and more intuitive sorting of rules.
I really like having more uses for physical skills- especially Strength (waaay too many Dex fanboys out there). That said, Craft skills based on every different attribute? Some of the premises make a bit of sense, and some of them- not so much. Dex and Int in equal parts seem like they would overlap for most functions (steady hand for forging documents, cleverness for making locks of any size). Wisdom seems an odd attribute to require architects to have, so why do they craft buildings with it? Especially when Knowledge of architecture is using Int? Also not too thrilled to see a return of Concentration. If it includes combat casting functions, it's a must-have skill for any caster again, and is essentially a skill tax. If it doesn't, I'm reasonably sure that few people will use it unless the GM makes it a point to need it. Small notes: I really liked Linguistics as a skill, but you seem to have pulled it apart into several others. Not sure where learning languages goes anymore- it was terrible to pay skill points for a language and get nothing else out of it. I would almost price the bulk of Knowledge skills lower than any other skill. I have not been in many games where the Knowledge skills were as crucial as, say, Perception or Acrobatics- it's more of a useful perk instead of a necessary vehicle for the character. Primary reason: if it is sorely needed, and the player blows their roll- story stops dead. You either know something or you don't, and can't reroll within the rules (GMs might allow a reroll after gaining another point). Unless you are changing the time it takes to craft something, I would leave the Craft skills cheap. Even using them to craft magic items, it looks like the aspiring artisan will need to sink points into Knowledge: Arcana anyway, making every craft skill cost more than one point to begin with. It does get cheaper the more craft skills you acquire, but by then, it's already extremely expensive. Also, have you considered the process for enchanting existing items (weapons, armor, jewelry, etc.) rather than making them yourself? Will that only require Knowledge: Arcana, potentially making it very, very valuable? How will spell requirements of objects (and perhaps the lack of a few required spells) affect their crafting? All things considered though, pretty good. Also, good timing, I was about to pick up the PDF "A Skill for Everything" to look at just this subject...
60. A fat man in gaudy jewelry sits with a richly-appointed, much more tastefully dressed woman and a dwarf man dressed as a craftsman. They seem to be arguing off-and-on every few minutes or so, remaining fairly quiet in between. [Sense Motive: The fat man doesn't like the tavern much, and likes the dwarf less. The woman seems bored. They are all trying to remain civil despite being agitated.] [Perception: They are talking about the trip they are soon to take. They are waiting for their caravan master to arrive (either to make arrangements or to leave, depending on the time of day).] 61. An impossibly muscled woman sits, talking enthusiastically to a handsome young man with an expensive instrument slung. [Perception or Heal: The woman's muscle growth is at the border of what could be called natural. Other than this, she would be fairly attractive. The man appears to be a Bard, but worships an obscure deity of magic.] [Sense Motive: The two are familiar with one another already, and the man is not bothered in the least by his companion's physiology.] [Knowledge: Geography/History: The woman's garb and a few subtle markings indicated she is a member of the closest tribe known for their Berzerkers.] [DM: The woman was born this way, and the man is her only frequent companion whom she cares for dearly. Besides being a talented Barbarian, she also has the ability to predict the weather for the incoming week with perfect accuracy.]
New Puppeteer Progression Chart All-New Marionette Ability Sheet Rearranged a few things. Swapped out the excessive number of Cores for some bonus feats. Made Sacrificial Doll a bit harder on the Marionette. Removed the link between the number of Marionettes and their hit dice, and went with a chart instead. Changed the number of prepared cores a Puppeteer can have. Explicitly stated that Marionettes were mute without Ventriloquism. Cleared up Cut the Strings and Marionette's range a little.
This started as a re-build of the Dread Necromancer, but contains a great deal of new material as well. Let me know of any balance issues you see. BAB: poor
Level / Ability
Class Abilities:
Channel Negative Energy: The Dark Necromancer can channel negative energy as an evil cleric can, with two differences- she uses her Charisma modifier for any saving throws and number of times per day it can be used, and she may choose to affect herself with her channeled energy. The latter will become significant later. Channeling feat- choose one at 1st level
2. Control Undead: The Dark Necromancer gains the Control Undead feat, assuming she can meet all the prerequisites. At 2nd level
2. Reaper's Fingers: The Dark Necromancer's fingers become drawn, and the last bone of each digit lengthens to a point. The Dark Necromancer gains claws and immediately becomes proficient in them. They deal the same amount of damage as an unarmed strike, but she is considered armed while using them. She loses the use of her claws while wearing magical gloves or gauntlets. At 5th level, they become charged with death, allowing her do deal +4 points of negative energy damage with any weapon she wields. This becomes +8 damage at 10th level, and +12 damage at 15th level. She may choose not to deal this negative energy damage. At 3rd level
2. Death Without: Undead are treated as their previous creature type with regards to how the Dark Necromancer's spells affect them. For example, a human zombie would be treated as a human, and therefore susceptible to Scare. A skeletal giant would count as a giant, a Dracolich would count as a dragon, etc.
Bonus Spells: The Dark Necromancer gains further knowledge of their chosen specialization at certain levels, and by expressing a desire to concentrate further, can learn even more. Bonus spells are taken from the necromancy school from either the cleric or sorcerer/wizard spell lists. (this ability is meant to enable you to gain non-core spells: Encyclopedia Arcane: Necromancy is a good source) Cold Mind: Constantly dwelling on the mystic secrets of death affects the Dark Necromancer's thought patterns. They gain +2 to saving throws to resist mind-affecting effects and sleep effects. This bonus grows to +4 at 10th level, and +6 at 15th level. On a roleplaying note, she becomes more somber and matter-of-fact, with any humor most likely to be deadpan. At 6th Level
2. Dread Reach: The Dark Necromancer gains a form of blindsight that can detect only living and undead targets. The Necromancer can only distinguish if the target is living or undead; constructs, oozes and equipment carried by the targets cannot be detected. The targets appear as semi-colorful silhouettes, and can be seen up to a range of 120'. Using this form of sight is a swift action, and turns the Necromancer's eyes black or dull grey. Spells that blind the necromancer have a 50% chance of negating this form of blindsight- blindfolds and shades have no effect. Deafness does not affect the blindsight.
At 8th Level
2. Dark Talisman: The Dark Necromancer can form a potent talisman of Death. This can take many forms, from a mummified hand, a jar full of eyes, a scroll of skin, an etched chalice, a cursed mirror, all the way to a painted skull on a strap. By brandishing this talisman and reciting eldritch passages, the Dread Necromancer can amplify their spells. While maintaining concentration (a move action) to recite the passages, any spells cast will either be treated as though affected by Heighten Spell with no cost or it will heighten the caster level by 2 levels. Reciting the eldrich passages is necessary for the function of the talisman, but does not interfere with the verbal components of the spell.
3. Summon Familiar: As per wizard. Swarm Form: The Dark Necromancer can break down their entire body into numerous small creatures, either blackbirds, rats, flies, worms or beetles. During this time, they cannot cast spells, wield weapons, wear armor or use class abilities. In all forms except blackbirds, they cannot communicate verbally. They have complete control over where the swarm moves and can interact with objects one size category smaller than their original body. The swarm is considered to have hit dice, hit points and saving throws equivalent to the Necromancer. The swarm can be attacked and dispersed; if this happens, the Dark Necromancer reforms in the square of the swarm at 0 hit points and dying. A swarm dispersed by nonlethal damage will reform once it recovers positive hit points once again.
Cold Eyes and Dead Ears: The Dark Necromancer can, at will, shift their consciousness into an undead thrall they control. They perceive the world as if their senses were located in the thrall's body (for those thralls with no ears, eyes, nose, skin or tongue such as skeletons). Their own body remains in a state of deep concentration, and is immobile and for all purposes helpless. While controlling the thrall, they can cast spells, verbally communicate as long as the thrall has a mouth (the magic enables the communication, the thrall's form is merely the focus), use class abilities appropriate to their thrall's form and make use of any supernatural attacks they have. They do not retain any magical item effects while controlling the thrall, however.
Swell the Ranks: The Dark Necromancer's ability to control undead greatly surpasses that of others. While other casters are able to command 4 HD worth of undead per caster level, the Dark Necromancer adds this bonus to the number of hit dice per caster level they can control. So at 8th level, with Swell the Ranks + 2, the Dark Necromancer can control 6 HD worth of undead per caster level. At 10th level this grows to 8 HD per caster level, and at 12th level it grows to 10 HD per caster level. Finally, at level 14, it grows to 12 HD per caster level. Crafting Feat: The Dark Necromancer gains the Craft Wondrous Items feat if she does not already have it. If she does, she gains another crafting feat of her choice she doesn't already have. Lich Ascension: At the apex of her career, the Dark Necromancer tranforms into an undead creature. She gains the Senses, Armor Class, Hit Dice, Defensive abilities, ability modifiers and skills of the Lich template, and acquires the Undead subtype. She does not gain any of the Melee attacks or Special attacks of the Lich template.
Spell List:: Cantrips: Read Magic, Bleed, Detect Magic, Detect Undead, Disrupt Undead 1st level
2nd level
3rd level
4th level
5th level
6th level
7th level
8th level
9th level
I had actually had this exact same thought process, and had come up with a little bit of a build to do just this. Malisteen brings up some very good points, which made me reluctant to post this. However, in the end, I just wanted to have fun trying to come up with a thematic and semi-reasonable build for a Dread Necromancer. Dread Necromancer (Replaces Rebuke Undead)
1. Two options for first level abilities
2. Control Undead: The Dread Necromancer gains the Control Undead feat, assuming she can meet all the prerequisites. To replace Negative Energy Burst (at 3rd level):
Choose one: 1. Death Within: The Dread Necromancer can temporarily infuse herself with the aspect of Death. During this time she gains +4 to resist mind-affecting effects, sleep effects, poisons, and negative energy effects, her DR from Lich Body becomes 5/bludgeoning and magic, and mindless undead ignore her unless she directly attacks them. She will have no pulse, cannot be made to Bleed, and does not need to breathe (but can if she wants to). She can also opt to look rotted or desiccated. This power can be activated 3 + her Charisma modifier times a day. This power can be activated two ways; if activated as a swift action, it lasts for a number of turns equal to her class level. If activated using a minute-long ritual, it lasts a number of hours equal to her Charisma modifier, but this activation can only be done once a day and prevents any further use that day. It takes a similar one-minute ritual to end the effect prematurely. The bonuses grow to +6 to resist and DR 10/bludgeoning and magic at level 10, and +8 to resist and DR 15/bludgeoning and magic at level 15. Note the bonus to resist doesn't stack with Mental Bastion, it overlaps it. 2. Death Without: Undead are treated as their previous creature type with regards to how the Dread Necromancer's spells affect them. For example, a human zombie would be treated as a human, and therefore susceptible to Scare. A skeletal giant would count as a giant, a Dracolich would count as a dragon, etc.
As an alternative to Scabrous Touch (6th level):
Choose one: 1. Brush With Death: Should the Dread Necromancer have taken the Death Within ability, they may pass it to a willing subject with a touch. That subject gains the abilities and attributes (including the optional withered appearance, chosen by the Necromancer). Also, when the subject of Death Within takes negative energy damage, they are instead healed for one-quarter of the damage that would have been dealt. They gain an Advanced Learning opportunity at 11th level. 2. Dread Reach: The Dread Necromancer gains a form of blindsight that can detect only living and undead targets. The Necromancer can only distinguish if the target is living or undead; constructs, oozes and equipment carried by the targets cannot be detected. The targets appear as semi-colorful silhouettes, and can be seen up to a range of 120'. Using this form of sight is a swift action, and turns the Necromancer's eyes black or dull grey. Spells that blind the necromancer have a 50% chance of negating this form of blindsight- blindfolds and shades have no effect. Deafness does not affect the blindsight.
3. Scabrous Touch: Unmodified
As an alternative to Summon Familiar (7th level):
Choose one: 1. Master's Champion: The Dread Necromancer may appoint any one undead under her sole control to be her champion. This undead must be controlled and either mindless or willing to be so appointed. This requires a touch and a quick incantation, but grants the undead many benefits. It loses any appetites or diet needs it previously had (such as a ghoul's hunger for flesh or a vampire's thirst for blood), but can still gain benefits from partaking (if any). It gains +1 to attack rolls (+1 per 3 levels of the Dread Nec.), the same in deflection modifier to AC, and 3 additional hit points per hit dice. These last until the Dread Necromancer withdraws the boon, appoints a new champion, or the undead is destroyed. The boon can be withdrawn at any time with a similar incantation (a free action). 2. Dark Talisman: The Dread Necromancer can form a potent talisman of Death. This can take many forms, from a mummified hand, a jar full of eyes, a scroll of skin, an etched chalice, a cursed mirror, all the way to a painted skull on a strap. By brandishing this talisman and reciting eldritch passages, the Dread Necromancer can amplify their spells. While maintaining concentration (a move action) to recite the passages, any spells cast will either be treated as though affected by Heighten Spell with no cost or it will heighten the caster level by 2 levels. Reciting the eldrich passages is necessary for the function of the talisman, but does not interfere with the verbal components of the spell.
3. Summon Familiar: Unmodified.
I offer alternatives to the Scabrous Touch since I barely ever used it when playing my own Dread Necromancer. The alternatives to Summon Familiar was because of the theme from PF for not having to have an animal with you if you didn't want one. All the extra learning opportunities was to help take advantage of all the necromancy splatbooks, and to keep the theme of a spell-driven necromancer. I'm probably opening myself to a lot of flak, but tell me what you think. |
