The Ronyon's page

A mount can save you actions, so any of the Archetypes that get you a ridable pet could be decent.
I wonder if there is one that gets you a focus point AND a rideable pet with the dedication.
I'm partial to the Goat because of the climb speed.

The Psychic choice that could work well with the thralls is Infinite Eye and their Amped Guidance and later Glimpse Weakness.
Tangible Dream for Amped Shield feels especially useful to increase your own survival.

A sack full of snakes keeps better and is more compact.
They can go longer without food/water and Consume Flesh needs fresh corpses.
Oil of unlife?
Poison for your claws?
Oh, a pick and a shovel!
Traps for small animals?

kwodo wrote:

Invictus Fatum wrote:

Here's a thought. Perhaps thralls differ based on the type summoned and thus feel more mechanically useful and varied.

When you create thrall you get the initial choice of:

Skeleton - attacks when summoned
Flesh - attempts to grab when summoned
Ghost - attempts to intimidate when summoned

All would use your SA modifier and all would then be treated exactly the same after the initial roll. All of these things are things any PC can do from lvl 1 so I don't see it as OP, but it would make for some cool variety and make my thralls feel special.

If thos is too strong by some accounts, perhaps that is based on the initial Grim Facination you choose and then there are level 1 feats you can get to add the other choices.

with those I can see an issue with Ghost not interacting with MAP like the other two and, if using Demoralize rules, each creature targeted would then be immune for 10 mins

I dont see it not interacting with MAP as a problem as Demoralize is a legit 1 action tactics you or anybody can do anyway. Frankly I see it as action compression like so many other actions various classes get (thrall plus demoralize).

As to being immune for 10 minutes, that's an issue, but can be approached a few ways. If you rule it is the thrall (not Necromancer) making the Demoralize attempt, then a new thrall could do it just fine. This may be a bit too powerful though. If you rule it is the Necromancer making the Demoralize, then they would be immune, though it is similar to the Braggart Swashbucker and their Intimidation to gain Panache.

Maybe making the Necromancer a little OP via this "new Thrall, no immunity" Demoralize would be a good thing?

If ghosts have this Demoralize action and we give skeletons a ranged attack instead of their weak reflex save, then only flesh thralls would need to close with their target to make an impact on gameplay.

I usually create a hidden village or a quietly practicing family for my morally different characters to come from.

The idea that some individuals have knack for certain magic,or are born into the practice is a simple place to start.
No need for crazed dedication, it's just comes easy to you, or it's just a way of life.

In RL, "alternative" beliefs exist invisibly all around us.
If you know your practices would be hated and looked down upon, you are liable to hide them, but you might never give them up, especially if they give you actual power.

The more obscure your practices, the easier it is to mask them.
In a world like Golarion, there are "acceptable" ways to summon undead, so Create Thrall should hardly make a ripple.

I do wish life sense was basic to the class starting from level 1.
If you can sée the energies at work, all the more reason you would pursue an interest in them.

"When you cast the spell, you can have up to one thrall created by this spell make a melee unarmed Strike using your spell attack modifier for the attack roll."
It says one thrall created by this spell, not one thrall created by this casting of the spell.

I think any of the Thralls created from any casting of Create Thrall can be the Thrall that "you can have up to one thrall make a melee unarmed Strike"

As it reads right now I think any necromancer casting Create Thrall could affect any Thrall created by the spell, even if that spell originated from another character entirely.

I would like to see it grant Martial Weapon Proficiency.

The Ronyon wrote:

I'm better off grabbing the old Nobel background and flavoring the retainers as undead servants.

Incidentally, there are no retainers that I know of in the game. You might be thinking of a different game but I don't know of any way to get retainers other than picking up some hirelings for between 1 and 5 silver per day, or possibly reflavouring an eidolon or non-animal companion...

Yeah, I keep doing this.

It's the idea that they are an extension that makes the idea that they can Interact but they can't make me more effect in mundane tasks, that much more annoying.
As soon as you give me 3 sets of manipulative limbs and tell me they can move X weight Y far, you are multiplying what I can reasonably get done.

Phantasmal Minions "can move and use Interact actions to do things such as fetch objects"
That's about what any apprentice in any trade starts out doing.
Add tireless, unpaid and obedient to your will and you can really get things done.

I love me some Minions, but I'm actually not in favor of giving Thralls the ability to perform ANY Interaction.
In my opinion,Phantasmal Minions and Telekinetic Hand cover the fantasy just fine and they come with a price that makes flooding the dungeon, battlefield or cornfield with them cost prohibitive.

What if we give Create Thrall the ability to "stick" Thralls to other creatures.
The target would make a Reflex, Fortitude or Will save against the Necromancer class DC.

If they critically fail the Thrall goes with them wherever they go,and is considered to be flanking the target,until it is destroyed or the target Escapes.

If the target fails they are flanked by the created Thrall and it goes where they go,till the begining of the Necromancers next turn unless it is destroyed or the target Escapes before then.

If the target succeeds they are flanked by the created Thrall and it goes where they go, for the rest of that turn,unless it is destroyed or the target Escapes before then.

If the target critically succeeds, no Thrall appears.

This gives a way to attack flying and swimming targets, and it lets PCs carry Thralls with them for offensive and defensive purposes.

If this were to be adopted, the Thralls should probably be weightless and share a space with the target.

It could be restricted only to Will saves and flavored as spirits.

Just another idea on how to make the Necromancer/Thrall relationship fun and simple.

Vomit forth ectoplasm?

Cough up an owl pellet?

Open a vein, or your entrails?

They step from behind, from that corner of the eye that sees things creeping up from behind,late at night,when you should be safe at home in bed, instead of out roaming the darkness...

Another solution to explain floating undead-piles of bodies.
Imagine a colum of flesh, bones or ectoplasm, extending from the necromancers square.
Kinda Tokyo Ghoul style.

These fountains of necrotic force would hold the Thrall in place.
They can't be attacked anymore than most spell effects, and the disappear when the Thrall does.

No mechanic, just another way to picture Thralls in the air.

Well, they already have better than average Focus point recovery.
I would love a "souls for spell slots" mechanic.
Make Life Tap a class feature, let it cost only one action, and have it grant a spell slot.
Maybe a maximum level slot, for all the hassle involved.

Obviously this would need some limits, but if these were the only slots available, the limits could be very liberal.

Another way to make a Necromancer with magical abilities but without spell slots would be a Focus spell that allows access to Summoning spells, and let's the summoned creatures use all of their Spells.

Giving the Necromancer way to trade Focus points/sacrifices to complete Rituals or to create magic items could also give them magic, without spell slots.

Narratively, skeleton archers and flying spirits address this issue.
Zombies could do a dead man's float...

Game mechanics wise,giving out ranged attacks and flight to Thralls gets more and more complicated.
What if Thralls created in the water, or on land, stayed where you put them, while thralls created in the air stayed where you put them until the end of your turn,then went poof?

Alternatively,we could decide that all Thralls stay where you created them,so feel free describe your Thralls as you wish to fit your needs.
Zombies for floating in water or spirits for floating in the air, skeletons for whatever.

I think it should target Will saves.
It's already associated with spiritual stuff, and we already have focus spells targeting Fortitude and AC.

I had presumed that most focus spells in the game cost two actions, but I think I was wrong.
Regardless,what if it were a single action spell?

What if it could grant a spell slot instead of healing?
Since it costs a Focus point, there is a natural limit built in.
It would be a very flavorful way to increase Necromancer spell casting.

I think the action granted from casting of Create Thrall should be usable with any Thrall that you the caster has created.
It's one of the weakest uses of Thralls anyway.

I'm presuming Summoners get flight for their Eidolons at some point?

The extra action is free movement, and that seems very worthwhile.

What about allowing ANY undead you control to count as a Thrall for purposes of spells and class abilities?
Mostly you wouldn't want to sacrifice Summons,Familiars,Companions or some of the creatures created in Rituals, but being able to use the Thrall basic attack would be nice, especially on the Familiar.

Allowing non-Thrall Undead to be used for necromancer focus spells without being destroyed would be an exciting reward for investing in them.

Ectar wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Ectar wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

There's also Carryall, though you'll have to wait until 9th level to do it. Good news is you'll be able to carry around I think two or three thralls on it? Just stack 'em up!

No go. Thralls are undead creatures

Which is why I said you need to wait until 9th level. Then you can cast it as a 4th-rank spell, which can carry creatures.

Neat. I didn't realize that spell got changed in the remaster. Cool!

It also scales up to carrying double what it did previously; I'm real glad for the buff. It looks like a fun spell for a high-level caster to flex with now, and I have always been a fan of those spells that let you do fairly mundane stuff, just more magically.

Do you know any magic items that cast this spell?

So is the early Summoner in the same boat?

The Ronyon wrote:

n8_fi wrote:

*snip*

With Thralls like this, I'm never walking anywhere, my butt will rarely leave my palanquin.

They will be bringing my a dinning room table with me most places, so my party can take cover behind it.
They will dig tunnels, deliver explosives/accelerants and set them off,break down walls,strip dungeons of treasure,gather wood for bonfires,drop stones on my enemies, redirect rivers,etc.

Their bodies won't need to become difficult terrain , they will bring the piles of junk with them.
Seriously, just tarps filled with whatever we loot from the dungeon (which will be everything) dropped when they are destroyed, should be plenty to clog up the battle field.

These are the kind of things I think of when you give me access to disposable servants
Fun for me, but could be a problem for the table.

Except very little of the above would be possible considering I've only been discussing Interacts and Strides as part of a grave cantrip (or other single-action effect).

- Your thralls could carry your palanquin or your table, but that would have to be your one chosen exploration activity (Repeat a Spell), and may even cause fatigue at GM discretion. Plus, even this might require some GM allowance as Repeat a Spell is supposed to allow a single spell, so you 1-minute duration thralls wouldn't last long enough to be controlled continuously.
- Digging tunnels essentially always requires an Athletics check, so would not be covered by "Interact action not requiring a check." Plus, you would still have to be within 30' of a thrall to control it using the stuff in this thread, which seems a reasonable limit against the remote explosives shenanigans.
- Massive projects like reshaping rivers fall under a similar category to digging, but even so you're essentially just talking about a couple free unskilled, severely limited hirelings. That's not that crazy.
- No matter how much "junk" a Small or Medium creature is carrying, it is...

Well I guess it's my turn to be let down in the fulfillment of class fantasy department.

The idea that I could create and control multiple beings that move up to 10 bulk but that wouldn't significantly affect what I could accomplish, is immersion breaking.
The idea that the body of a Small sized Thrall could create a square of Difficult Terrain, but the 10 bulk of its carrying has no effect makes zero sense.

So if "Interact action not requiring a check" does not at least have include carrying a palanquin in exploration mode,digging holes in exploration mode,or junking up the terrain, then it's not a problem, but it's also not impactful.
I'm better off grabbing the old Nobel background and flavoring the retainers as undead servants.

What impactful thing CAN "Interact action not requiring a check" do?

The Ronyon wrote:

Create Thrall plus Reach of the Dead let's you put one Thrall at 30 feet, the next at 60 and one more at 90.

Your Focus spells also add to your effective range.
Dead Weigh should be very effective against flyers.

Putting something far away on the ground isn't the problem- putting it high up is the issue. In your example, Create Thrall would create one thirty feet in the air, and it would plummet to the ground and be destroyed. Your second action wouldn't benefit from Reach of the Dead.

Dead Weight can only target a creature within fifteen feet of a thrall, so any creature flying 20 feet up (pretty normal for flight) will be out of reach.

Good points.

What simple weapon has the longest range?

Now I want my thralls to resemble angelic infants.
That way, when I throw one at a normal, decent person, they have to drop everything in an attempt to catch it!

Hmm, are they immune to poison?
Feeding Thralls to monsters might be feasible.
Alchemist/Necromancer?

The Ronyon wrote:

Some focus spells allow you to move Thralls.

The fact that they are focus spells limits how much that happens.
I'm fine with moving 3 Thralls a turn, but that is more than most of the focus spells do.

The idea is that don't allow to move more thralls than you are currently able to create to avoid slowdown the things morte than the Create Thrall would.

So maxing out at 4 an Action, 12 a turn?

Create Thrall plus Reach of the Dead let's you put one Thrall at 30 feet, the next at 60 and one more at 90.
Your Focus spells also add to your effective range.
Dead Weigh should be very effective against flyers.

I'm imagining a Thrall held and used like shield.
Familiars,Mage hand, unseen servants, animal companions, all potential Thrall caddies.

I don’t think I’m understanding people’s issues with Interact actions. Thralls start from a position of “can’t act unless the Necromancer’s effect specifically tells them what to do.” Being able to Interact through a control spell lets them hold and carry items, sure, but it doesn’t let them make attacks with weapons. They also still couldn’t Activate Magic or alchemical items even with only Interact components (Activate is its own activity with Interact as a subordinate action); these are also actions which generally make sense to be too complicated for a thrall to perform. If there are other things people are concerned about, I’m pretty confident that viewing the thralls from this direction of granted actions would assuage the concern.

The only thing I can think that this actually requires in rules text is stating the Bulk limits of thralls; based on being level -1 creatures with no stats, it would be easy to just say encumbered 5, max 10.

With Thralls like this, I'm never walking anywhere, my butt will rarely leave my palanquin.

Their bodies won't need to become difficult terrain , they will bring the piles of junk with them.
Seriously, just tarps filled with whatever we loot from the dungeon (which will be everything) dropped when they are destroyed, should be plenty to clog up the battle field.

These are the kind of things I think of when you give me access to disposable servants
Fun for me, but could be a problem for the table.

Some focus spells allow you to move Thralls.
The fact that they are focus spells limits how much that happens.
I'm fine with moving 3 Thralls a turn, but that is more than most of the focus spells do.

I think I like the weak, non-moving Thralls because they open things up for large numbers.
Maybe a Troop or Swarm would be a better way to represent this?

Do Thralls go poof or melt away when they are destroyed?
Or do they leave behind bodies?
"they are not minions with the summoned trait."
That sentence suggests they would leave behind bodies.

"Thrall Enhancement You can still make use of a destroyed thrall’s flesh. Whenever one of your thralls is destroyed, you can cause the thrall to leave behind difficult terrain in the space they were destroyed. The difficult terrain lasts for 10 minutes."

That paragraph implies that without this particular Thrall Enhancement, you can't pile enough Thrall bodies in a square to make it into Difficult Terrain.
Or maybe it's still possible,just harder to do.

Right now you can just add another Thrall anywhere you want one to be, as long as that spot is within 30' feet of you.
Decoupling Thrall movement from the Focus spells will drastically increase their potential range.

IF that is a problem,and I don't know that it is, we could limit the Thralls that can be moved to only those within range of a given casting of Create Thrall.
That would keep the movement range similar to the current Create range.

I'm not convinced Thrall movement is a good idea.
Moving them means resolving how they interact with the terrain and other characters as they move.
Unless said interaction is effectively none existent, it will take up time.

This brings me back to eliminating their ability to force a Tumble Through check.
We could reduce their occupation of a square to nothing more than increased movement cost and the first level of Cover.
We can make the Cover only protect allied and the movement penalty only affect enemies.
We could allow Thralls to be dismissed or moved
We could allow Thralls to share space with other characters, but if we allow them to be dismissed or moved, I don't think that it is a needed adjustment.

Ah,well also no no room to summon more Thralls then.

I can't see why not.
It seems intended.
On your point about available space,maybe there does need to be a deletion ability built into the spell.
Or allowing Thralls to share space with other characters.
Or both.
As things stand, I think you can just target the space right above them.
Thrall appears, attacks,falls down, pops out of existence?
Sounds messy.
More reason to allow deletion.

The question is does it stop movement through their square and if so tumble through is just a dc 10 action? It's weird because Thralls are and yet are not the most overpowered mechanic, if your DM's minions hit them with non-AoE effects they you basically don't want to win the fight and you can argue your DM is throwing the encounter but at the same time if they are't targetted then what is the point of them being creatures? Also if you want to stop an enemy from running away just make a box of Thralls around the battlefield, can't tumble through if there are 2 enemies back to back!

But I do like Thralls though.

Tumble Through one, attack the other?

I have suggested, in that other thread, a compromise.
Giving the Necromancer the ability to dismiss the Thralls won't hurt anything but it also won't help a GM that finds them too challenging.

So let's water down Trails even further.
The only effect they have on movement would be a 5' increase movement cost per Thrall occupied square.
The position issue didn't occur to me, but allowing any creature to share space with a Trall could be a boon to player and gm alike.

I'm really confused.
Why the concern about Thralls taking up space?
Am I wrong in my understanding of how moving through occupied squares works?
Is it because you can move through but not occupy a friendly characters space?

So it does in fact specify that you can command one Thrall to attack once for every casting of Create Thrall,a spell which only takes one action to cast.

"When you cast the spell, you can have up to one thrall created by this spell make a melee unarmed Strike using your spell attack modifier for the attack roll. "

Are you upset that you can't command more Thralls per action?
You can cast Create Thrall and use a focus spell on the same turn.
That's three actions dedicated to doing damage.
Most focus spells in the game cost a minimum of 2 actions.
Assuming you don't expect that baseline to change, are wanting them to work on a 1-3 action sliding scale,like Harm?
Are you just wanting more damage for your 2 actions?

- There's no way to use TWO Thralls per round, even as a 3-action option.

- You cannot order multiple Thralls to attack. Say what you want about weapons, if I have 3 Thralls, I should be able to make 3 Strikes, one with each.

I'm not understanding this.

We have rules for Familiars as assistants
What undead familiars do we have?

I don't see how there can be an excess Thrall problem.
They don't hinder the PCs in any significant way.
The worst they do is provide lesser cover.
I can see making that an ally only benefit.

Moving a single Thrall isn't a big deal, but moving handfuls of Thralls would slow combats down considerably.

Since create thrall is 30 ft range, it'll be somewhat less than 120; you'll have to leave space open to move and then move in order to have empty spaces to target and create more. Space is more of a limiter than anything else.

Space to move?

Its hard to imagine 3 inert bodies can cause that much trouble.
They are worse at stopping movement than a 2 action cantrip.
They are worse at stopping movement than a Net or Bolo attack.
Thralls are very weak, but having squares on the battlefield that have the barest possible chance of slightly slowing down the monsters is really bothering some people.

I do think having to roll and resolve Tumble Through would suck up time, and the enemy is liable to succeed anyway.
So how about this:anyone can move freely through a Thralls space, but it cost an extra 5' for non-allies.
It's not Difficult Terrain, which means it is not as easily countered and it can stack with Difficult Terrain, making for some cool combos.
No actions of their own,auto dying from any attack,barely slowing foes who walk through their square and granting lesser cover, that is about as non-impactful as a creature can get.

If a foe wipes out a significant number of Thralls with a AOE it's gonna take a significant number of Necromancer actions to replenish them.

Thralls should be able to steal actions, if they force a Tumble Through,and the enemy fails their check ,but a lot of time the opponent will just be able go around.
Tangle Vine is a more reliable way to slow down a foe.
Create Thrall is kinda like a spamable Scatter Scree, with a smaller area.

No matter what,giving the Necromancer an ability to erase Thralls will not make any significant difference for GM or Player.
The player can largely ignore them and Thralls thwarting the GM/ monsters is kinda the point of their existence, just like summons or animal companion, but with less power than either.

If space is a concern, simply just don't call your full allotment of thralls.

I'm concerned a bunch of people are going to complain to the developers about this and the final class will be much less capable of making bodies.

Using Create Thrall is the basic way to attack with a Thrall.

But I agree, Thralls are not really an issue, they don't stop you from moving unless you are the enemy.

Well, it's Bless for me.
What do y'all think?

How about unlimited casting of Phantasmal Minion?
I think that would be powerful, but combat limited.

I think the Tumble Through DC should be class DC.
I also think there is little reason to be concerned about dismissing Thralls.
They count as allies, so they do not imped the movement of PCs.
They do count as lesser cover, and that should be addressed, but otherwise, a battle field full of Thralls is the enemies problem, and only a boon to a Necromancer.

The image of a Necromancer and his cadre striding unimpeded through a wall of writhing undead should be pretty intimidating.

Thralls have Size, but do they have weight?
I ask , because dropping Thralls on the enemy is currently a possibility.
Stacking Thralls in order to overcome an obstacle seems doable.
Taking Cover behind a Thrall would be weird.
Does a Thrall body disappear by default?

Back to the lesser cover, Thrall bodies should offer no cover to anyone but allies.

I would like Spirit thralls to be unnoticed until they attack, but their isn't anyway to make that not broken.

Creating a thrall is almost always better than moving one to a new position in range (and if you allow thralls to move out of range, that's a noticeable buff). However, as soon as people start moving the token over the board, more cognitive processes engage and more people will start talking. I'm going to second Tridus- If Thralls start moving frequently, certain players are going to slow the game to a crawl, and I don't think, "Just don't let them play Necromancer" is a good solution.

I would like a Base Kinesis-like activity for thralls doing menail stuff out of combat, though.

100% agree.

I would like an option to "stick" minions onto a willing target, so that they share their space and move with them.
This will allow useful movement without added decision points slowing down play.
As it stands, there are some good reasons to pick up and carry a Thrall, "sticky" thralls would just make things smoother.
A feat that lets you use Create Thrall to make "Sticky" thralls, plus gives you a Focus spell that grants an AC or Save bonus to any creature with a Thrall stuck to them.

Should "you can have up to one thrall created by this spell

make a melee unarmed Strike" be interpreted as referring to one thrall made by *this casting* of the cantrip, or can I have any thrall already on the board lash out as well? Technically, they were all created by that spell (except for the meatier ones you get later on).

Technically,any created by anyone with said spell, but not any created by Inevitable Return, making Inevitable Return Thralls harder to use.

I think the line should read"you can have up to one thrall created by ,your abilities
make a melee unarmed Strike"

I see some feats that work when the Thrall is adjacent to the Necromancer or an ally.
This plus the Thrall's lack of movement makes the ability to carry a Thrall desirable.

They can already be Small, but what do the weight?
I know, it's crazy, but I love the idea of a necromancer draped in ectoplasmic spirits that can be sacrificed at a moments notice.
It could be worthwhile to carry a skeletal viper or dismembered head in one hand.
A magical bag full of expendable spirits perhaps?
Can you throw them?

I think someone mentioned that each Thrall can only attack once.
I believe any Thrall created by this spell can attack once per casting of the spell.
So, if you have a Thrall within reach of a target , you can cast the spell, create a Thrall next to you, then attack with the Thrall next to the target.
If a foe ignores the Thrall next to them in favor of attacking a PC, they are at risk of more attacks.

Thralls are like pawns,ignore them and they get more dangerous, attack them and you are ignoring a PC

Id like to see Thralls have a way to disadvantage attacks against allies.
I guess they do count as (Lesser?)Cover, and that ain't nothing.

Bring able to "stick" Thralls to a target would be a great upgrade, without granting them movement of their own.

Is there a way to see through a Thralls senses?
That would be thematic.

Life Tap seems a little weak. Thematically, it's cool. But for an equal level enemy... well, creatures tend to have 15-20 HP per level, so on a failure you're dealing 10-15% of their health in damage and healing an ally by about 10%. It doesn't do a lot of healing or damage, so I worry that it's not going to feel very impactful a lot of the time. I'd straight up just double the healing on it probably? (I figure as is, a level 2 target is worth 4 HP healed... if they fail the save. Lay on Hands gives back 6 for a third of the actions spent, plus a significant AC bonus. The comparison is of course worse at odd levels due to the way the two scale, but it caps at 40 HP versus 60 HP at 20.) Double healing makes it give 4-12 HP in the same situation (I suppose this might actually be a bit too much? Maybe it should heal a constant amount as long as the enemy took damage, similar to the Paradox of Opposites witch, since it's easier to adjust that way)

Upping the healing could work, or if they made it a one action spell, it becomes an unique set up for spells with Fortitude saves.