1. Current version of school specialization severely limits character concepts. In short, Pathfinder Necromancer is only a Minion Master (to use Guild Wars terminology), and as such must be Evil to be used reasonably. Also, his granted abilities are significantly inferior to those of Universal School.
Hmm, replace "significantly" with "overwhelmingly".
The universal school needs to loses the spells at 2,4,6,10,12,14,16,18 the levels they give up nothing for them
2. Specialist bonus does not come with ability to control undead. In other words, use of this bonus is restricted until much higher level, and only that it is temporary. You also need to be Evil to use the bonus (even Animate Dead is an Evil spell).
Weak, restricting.
They need the ability to control them. I play a hallowfaust necromancer and we ruled that he had the ability like channel neg enegry without the energy[ used that mechanic to establish control]
3. Grave Touch (Su) aka "If you got an itch, I can I scratch your back". Inferior to spells. Useless unless you want to kill a Tarrasque (or Troll). Hmm, scratch this - it's useless against Tarrasque (and Trolls), too. Oh, and it's melee only.
I think this should be a ranged touch attack at the very lest as it is unuseable at low levels, I couldn't hit anything and with low hp and no armor it was not a good ideal to try
4. Animate (Su)... the best way to ruin financially a wizard. Material components cost a lot if you use them, and the effects are mediocre (8th level animation vs 5th level fireball - no contest here).
This should not need components to work
5. Deathless (Su). Should be (Ex) (you cannot negate Ex with antimagic). Should be a template (becoming an Undead is significantly more complex). And Lichdom (available since 11th level) is still much more beneficial.
If you're an Evil necromancer, you don't really care about stuff like being pretty, right?
Yeah it kinda is a needless power a +2 to nerco spells is much better
The universal school needs to loses the spells at 2,4,6,10,12,14,16,18 the levels they give up nothing for them
I can only agree on this.
And agree again.
Pardon? Did you mean that Universal school loses access to bonus spells?
He meant they should lose access to bonus spells because they already have enough good stuff. And I agree, too.
I agree that I really do see why a universalist needs bonus spells.
Director of Games
|
I think the Universalist school needs some work, but this is not the thread for it. Instead, we should be looking at the necromancy school, which also could use a bit of work. I am thinking about changing this one to grant you an undead companion, that would tie into the animal companion rules, but I am not set on this yet.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I realize that its not exactly easy in 3.5 to play a "white" necromancer, but having an undead companion automatically seems to pretty firmly say "I'm always evil."
Not saying this is good or bad, but its a bit more extreme than the previous (3.5) way of going about things.
|
Director of Games
|
I realize that its not exactly easy in 3.5 to play a "white" necromancer, but having an undead companion automatically seems to pretty firmly say "I'm always evil."
Not saying this is good or bad, but its a bit more extreme than the previous (3.5) way of going about things.
Yeah, I hear you on this and it is a concern of mine, which is why I am interested in feedback. I am really trying to avoid the white/black split on the necromancer school. I think there is plenty of room in the future for this sort of division, but I do not think it has a place in the core.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
For me necromancers have always been the wizard who specializes in manipulating life force (negative and positive energy) and not just the wizard who dabbles with death. Capable of weakening characters (lowering strength, sickening people, aging people, etc.) or bolstering them (increasing hitpoints, buffing saves, etc.). Clerics would see them as either a mockery or a cheap imitation while others would shun them for tampering with the human soul.
|
I agree with KEJr, I've always enjoyed playing neutral or good necromancers, avoiding the spells related to undeath and focusing on those that manipulate life force.
An undead companion, and the ability to command undead, has a very specific flavour. I can live with the extra HD, but not much further. It's interesting that the tendency is to view necromancers as disturbing - quite frankly I find Enchanters and Illusionists much more wicked. So either more schools get an alignment bent or none should.
The current Necromancy School is pretty much WAY Evil,
in that it supposes Creation/ Domination of Undead counter to the "Life Force/ Soul" of the originally living creature.
However, the Undead Companion that Jason mentioned could be written in such a way
that it's not Good or Evil. Good Necromancers could find/ attract an Undead Spirit
who is not mindless and still has a Good Soul, but chooses to ally itself to the "Good" Necromancer PC
because it feels aligned w/ the PC's actions/ goals, or are counter to the Evil Necromancers which CAUSED it's Undead state.
I have to say, I *LIKE* the flavor of the "grasping skeleton arms coming from the ground" :-)
I play a hollowfaust necromancer and used a 1st level spell to gain a short time undead companion a rat.
I dont have an issue with them commanding undead. The issue is just what does a non undead based necromancer do? Every one will give you a different story on that one so just how do we keep the powers good for both sides?
Ok guys after thinking over this here is what I have. Now keep in mind this is raw and has not been thought about to much. How ever this works as a good,evil or indifferent necromancer
Bonus: A necromancer is a master of life and death energy as such they may channel energy as a cleric of the same level. They may select negative or positive energy ,but this can not be changed.
1ST Ray of decay As a standard action you can make a ranged touch attack to deal 1d6 points of negative energy damage to a target. The range is 30' and you deal +1 points per 2 caster levels. Creatures struck by this ray fail any stabilization roll made within 1 min of the attack.
Lifeless Companion You gain a companion as a druid of your level. This companion may be a creature of the undead subtype of a shadow. The companion gains ability and levels same as a druids This creature need not be evil
Necromantic masteryYour school spells DC's increase by 2 and you gain Immunity from Negative energy and death effects
However, the Undead Companion that Jason mentioned could be written in such a way that it's not Good or Evil. Good Necromancers could find/ attract an Undead Spirit who is not mindless and still has a Good Soul, but chooses to ally itself to the "Good" Necromancer PC because it feels aligned w/ the PC's actions/ goals, or are counter to the Evil Necromancers which CAUSED it's Undead state.
I'm not sure how feasible an incorporeal undead companion would be right off the bat, but now that you mention it, it is kind of interesting to think about a good or neutral ghost of spirit of some sort that is drawn to the necromancer just out of his natural necromantic aura, rather than having been created by him.
That having been said, it feels like it might be a bit cluttered if the necromancer takes a familiar as his "bonded item," and also has an undead companion based on his necromancy specialization.
Plus, on days when he doesn't have his school bonus, what happens to the undead companion?
;-)
I'm hoping that Pathfinder Wizards will become better at making decisions and sticking with them...
I'm not sure how feasible an incorporeal undead companion would be right off the bat, but now that you mention it, it is kind of interesting to think about a good or neutral ghost of spirit of some sort that is drawn to the necromancer just out of his natural necromantic aura, rather than having been created by him.That having been said, it feels like it might be a bit cluttered if the necromancer takes a familiar as his "bonded item," and also has an undead companion based on his necromancy specialization.
Plus, on days when he doesn't have his school bonus, what happens to the undead companion?
How I was thinking was useing the shadow as the base, that fits easy enough as other classes have this feature. On days he loose his ablity would not matter if it moved up to the 8th level slot.
For me necromancers have always been the wizard who specializes in manipulating life force (negative and positive energy) and not just the wizard who dabbles with death. Capable of weakening characters (lowering strength, sickening people, aging people, etc.) or bolstering them (increasing hitpoints, buffing saves, etc.). Clerics would see them as either a mockery or a cheap imitation while others would shun them for tampering with the human soul.
I'm with Aaron Whitely here. I always remembered that in the 3e PHB, necromancy was described as the school that dealt with creation, destruction, and manipulation of life-force. Pity that when push came to shove, the spell list only dealt with the 'destruction' part. And fear spells, for no apparent reason.
It depends a bit on where Paizo sees necromancy fitting in thematically. Is it the magic of death, and nothing else? Because if it is, the current emphasis on undead creation, curses, and undead transformation of the self is probably reasonable. But I don't like this because it severely limits character concepts, as well as messing with party unity (and social acceptability) in many cases. Having an zombie or wight companion hanging around is really problematic when it comes to city settings, social adventures, or even staying in the inn.
I's prefer Necromancy to emphasies the 'manipulation and creation' bits a bit more. Make necromancy the magic of life force, rather than limiting it to the magic of undead. It gives us far more options. How about some buff spells that 'borrow' life force from one target and use it to buff an ally? Or buffs which 'burn up' a recipient's life force and leave them exhausted/damaged? Hell, is there any reason that ALL physical buff spells (Cat's Grace, Bull's Strength, Haste, Bear's Endurance, etc) shouldn't be necromancy - they all boost the recipient's life force, after all. It should, thematically, be possible to play a necromancer WITHOUT being a gribbly tomb-robber on the path to lichdom, and without having to voluntarily forsake a large percentage of your class features. Of course, an evil necromancer should have many more options available to them - temptation is the name of the game, after all...
Oh, and how about fixing Circle of Death, at some point? It's a spell that you'll first be able to cast at 13th level, but has a 9HD limit on what it can effect. Possibly useful under very specialised circumstances for a couple of level range (or for 13th-level BBEGs to cast at 9th level PCs...), but will you ever bother to prepare it at 15th level? 20th? How often do you fight <9hd critters at high levels anyway? Perhaps have the hit dice limit scale with caster level, and reduce the area to compensate. It's pretty useless as things stand...
|
[Apologies if this double posts, it seems to being getting eated.]
Ideally, the Undead Servant idea works, but should have two flavors, one a animated body (for the evil crew), the other an incorporeal manifestation of the spellcasters own soul (with no combat ability, but useful for spying and stuff, having the same senses and skills as the spellcaster, and therefore being able to 'Aid Other' on knowledge checks and stuff, as well as scout around within a certain range of him, being sucked back to him instantly if it gets too far away, and perhaps being disrupted by the near loss of connection and being unable to 'come out' again without a Concentration type check and a minute's concentration or whatever).
That way the 'white necromancer' is manipulating soul energy / life-force, but it's *his own* soul energy, and not freaking other people's stolen souls. The dude who wants a more combat capable minion uses the animated corpse.
Alternately, perhaps both options are available in good and evil flavors.
The 'white necromancer' isn't animating a *corpse,* he's infusing life-energy from himself into a contruct of wood, leather and bone, which statistically functions like a 'zombie,' and possibly even being affected by turning (since the spiritual energies within it, even if they come from him, count as spiritual energies and are affected by positive / negative energy).
The 'black necromancer' using the incorporeal spirit advisor would be using the bound soul of someone he's called up from their eternal rest, or perhaps just the fragmentary psychic residues that are contacted by Speak With Dead (a la the Gleaner class).
It's easy enough to just flavor the undead servant to be a crafted construct animated with the necromancers own life-force (which obviously cost him when it was created, but he 'got better,' and he doesn't have to worry about the painful and exhausting creation costs again unless it gets destroyed and must be replaced!). An elven spiritualist might assemble such a 'zombie' or 'skeleton' companion from leaves and branches, all twined together and animated with his own life-force, while a dwarven earth-turner might prefer to make his 'companion' out of good clean earth, and give it structure with wires and struts. In any case, the creature would count as 'undead by other means,' as the bodiless spiritual energies animating it can be affected like other disembodied spirits.
This second option sounds much more feasible for a short description, with the incorporeal spirit-spy option being something to add later as an alternate class feature for specialist necromancers who don't want a lumbering companion of either flesh and bone *or* leather and wood.
|
You could always have the white version follow the Olman philosphy of ancester worship. (See the Olman from Isle of Dread).
They're not evil, they revere their ancients and reanimate their bodies as worship.
You could also take the Eberron path and have a "Deathless" companion. Obviously this is WoTC property but the concept could be worked somehow.
Mind you, evil is a matter of perception as much as anything so seeing a wizard walking around with a dead beasty following them everywhere is gonna get some looks in the wrong lands, whether they're evil or not.
Cheers
|
I think the Universalist school needs some work, but this is not the thread for it. Instead, we should be looking at the necromancy school, which also could use a bit of work. I am thinking about changing this one to grant you an undead companion, that would tie into the animal companion rules, but I am not set on this yet.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Please, Jason, think again about this.
The necro specialist power has been a major gripe of mine since the Alpha 1.Associating automatically necromancer with undead is extremely restrictive and trite. It limits the charachter concept (the necrophile with anti-social tendencies, easily evil) and is totally useless to someone who doesen't want to play a non-animator necromancer, where other specialists can find their school powers useful despite their concept.
3. Grave Touch (Su) aka "If you got an itch, I can I scratch your back". Inferior to spells. Useless unless you want to kill a Tarrasque (or Troll). Hmm, scratch this - it's useless against Tarrasque (and Trolls), too. Oh, and it's melee only.
The grave touch, as many 1st level power, is meant to be a "I'm out of spells but not useless yet" way of helping casters... I find it on par with other specialists' (or domains', or bloodlines') powers. ;-)
|
I realize that its not exactly easy in 3.5 to play a "white" necromancer, but having an undead companion automatically seems to pretty firmly say "I'm always evil."
Yeah, I hear you on this and it is a concern of mine, which is why I am interested in feedback. Thoughts?
It's all about "flavour" ...
In all the discussion so far, I think we've been missing a huge storytelling concept opportunity for *good* necromancers - "I see dead people!", "ghost whisperer".
Perhaps befitting the Sorcerer more than the Wizard; none-the-less, consider a character who, through no fault of her own, is sought out by undead beings.
An undead companion could therefore be a corporeal (zombie, skeleton, floating skull) or non-corporeal (ghost, apparition, ancestor) spirit who seeks out the character, and hangs about whether the character cares for it or not. Others may / or may not be able to see these spirits/apparitions.
The character becomes a necromancer through circumstance, if not by choice, realising powers to assist them in dealing with the spirits and the dead that always seem attracted to her.
Not someone who selfishly manipulates the forces of life and death, but someone who is selflessly manipulated by them.
This could so be a *good* necromancer concept!
|
|
Mind you, evil is a matter of perception as much as anything so seeing a wizard walking around with a dead beasty following them everywhere is gonna get some looks in the wrong lands, whether they're evil or not.
Yeah, that's kind of why I proposed the idea of the white necromancer being able to use his own life-force to animate a manikin of leaves and sticks and dirt, because that sort of thing shambling around behind a person would look bizarre and fantastical, but not prompt cries of, 'OMG, he's a necromancer, defiling my grandma's body! Burn him!'
[Unless the viewer was a treant, in which case, bad luck, man...]
|
|
Mind you, evil is a matter of perception as much as anything so seeing a wizard walking around with a dead beasty following them everywhere is gonna get some looks in the wrong lands, whether they're evil or not.Yeah, that's kind of why I proposed the idea of the white necromancer being able to use his own life-force to animate a manikin of leaves and sticks and dirt, because that sort of thing shambling around behind a person would look bizarre and fantastical, but not prompt cries of, 'OMG, he's a necromancer, defiling my grandma's body! Burn him!'
[Unless the viewer was a treant, in which case, bad luck, man...]
I'm fully behind your idea, Set. So behind it that I was in front of it (see my earlier post). ;)
It's a simple matter of Jason adjusting the flavour text. But here's the rub: it is still an undead unless it is classified as a construct. So anyone casting detect undead would still notice the companion and judge the necromancer accordingly.
|
|
It's a simple matter of Jason adjusting the flavour text. But here's the rub: it is still an undead unless it is classified as a construct. So anyone casting detect undead would still notice the companion and judge the necromancer accordingly.
There is that, but it's just an example of semantic silliness in D&D. A Zombie is a mindless creature, incapable of malevolence, that detects as evil and undead. A Flesh Golem is stitched together from corpses and prone to going on berserk murderous rampages, but detects as neutral and non-undead.
It makes the kind of sense that is not.
It's a simple matter of Jason adjusting the flavour text. But here's the rub: it is still an undead unless it is classified as a construct. So anyone casting detect undead would still notice the companion and judge the necromancer accordingly.There is that, but it's just an example of semantic silliness in D&D. A Zombie is a mindless creature, incapable of malevolence, that detects as evil and undead. A Flesh Golem is stitched together from corpses and prone to going on berserk murderous rampages, but detects as neutral and non-undead.
It makes the kind of sense that is not.
It's the power source. Flesh golem is animated by some elemental or "divine" spark. Zombie is animated by some sort of negative energy engine. Not the kind of distinction a crowd of peasants with torches and pitchforks is going to make.
|
|
It's the power source. Flesh golem is animated by some elemental or "divine" spark. Zombie is animated by some sort of negative energy engine. Not the kind of distinction a crowd of peasants with torches and pitchforks is going to make.
Still, most crowds of peasants won't likely have Detect Undead available, so the elven 'white necromancer' with his pile of sticks and leaves animated by his own life-force will probably be able to get by telling people that he's a druid or something. :)
(or he can just leave it lying in a pile outside of town)
|
|
It's the power source. Flesh golem is animated by some elemental or "divine" spark. Zombie is animated by some sort of negative energy engine. Not the kind of distinction a crowd of peasants with torches and pitchforks is going to make.Still, most crowds of peasants won't likely have Detect Undead available, so the elven 'white necromancer' with his pile of sticks and leaves animated by his own life-force will probably be able to get by telling people that he's a druid or something. :)
(or he can just leave it lying in a pile outside of town)
That's what me LN necromancer used to do. Of course, then the CE Blackguard hid some stolen goods on the skeleton. Barrel of laughs.
Still, most crowds of peasants won't likely have Detect Undead available, so the elven 'white necromancer' with his pile of sticks and leaves animated by his own life-force will probably be able to get by telling people that he's a druid or something. :)(or he can just leave it lying in a pile outside of town)
** bold above mine **
It does fit with what someone posted above: the 3.0 PHB "manipulate, create or destroy life". And if the stick-totem or animated object is scaled to animal companions or somesuch, it would work. Cool idea.
I'm not sure how i respond to someone have their character class decided for them, but i just struggle to think of a reason someone would choose to expose themselves to the torment of visages of the dead.
Well, my LN Necromancer/Cleric of Vol/True Necromancer had fought the Last War (playing in Eberron), and, although not particularily FOND of Undead, thought "better re-use the corpses of dead people to fight a war than let young, living people die for it..."
It's the classical "this is not really a good thing to do, but in dire circumstances SOMEBODY has to do it".Think of something like Logan from X-Men "I'm the best in what I do, and what I do ain't pretty"...
I like Necromancers associating with the undead. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like that's their job.Their niche.
Is there a thread where people are saying that conjurers need to stop all that annoying, cliched summoning? Do people feel like the evoker is being typecast by using blasting spells?
As far as I'm concerned, Necromancers should have more powers that let him create and control undead, not less.
|
|
I like Necromancers associating with the undead. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like that's their job.Their niche.
Is there a thread where people are saying that conjurers need to stop all that annoying, cliched summoning? Do people feel like the evoker is being typecast by using blasting spells?
As far as I'm concerned, Necromancers should have more powers that let him create and control undead, not less.
But the problem is that Undead = Evil, therefore Necromancer = Evil. Its the only school with an alignment mentally associated with it. You can currently, with some resources, make a Good necromancer. Some of us are concerned that to do so in PRPG would require playing a Generalist and simply pretending to be a Necromancer.
|
|
As far as I'm concerned, Necromancers should have more powers that let him create and control undead, not less.But the problem is that Undead = Evil, therefore Necromancer = Evil. Its the only school with an alignment mentally associated with it. You can currently, with some resources, make a Good necromancer. Some of us are concerned that to do so in PRPG would require playing a Generalist and simply pretending to be a Necromancer.
It's a bigger potential issue when the Pathfinder Society goes Pathfinder rules-compliant. If the Necromancer Specialist can't function without relying on [Evil] spells and evil minions, then he's not playable in the Pathfinder Society, which forbids evil characters.
I also would like *more* powers that let a necromancer create and control undead, but they should be *options* (and, generally, spells), not core Necromancer Specialist class abilities that will turn out to be utterly anathema to any non-evil Necromancer.
Allowing a non-evil Necromancer to use his own life-force to animate unliving material just opens up options to make the class playable in non-evil campaigns (such as Pathfinder Society), while still thematically fitting the bill of mucker-about-with-life-energy and maker of servitor creatures.
He can still raise his fists to the heavens, shouting, 'My creation! It's alive!' while not robbing graves or pissing off the gods.
|
|
It's a bigger potential issue when the Pathfinder Society goes Pathfinder rules-compliant. If the Necromancer Specialist can't function without relying on [Evil] spells and evil minions, then he's not playable in the Pathfinder Society, which forbids evil characters.
I never thought about it. Good point.
While even a non-evil necromancer could potentially cast animate dead, doing so would result pretty quickly in an alignement shift, even though they use their unhallowed and gory creations to help cats stuck on the trees.
|
The problem with non-evil Necromancers is that the SRD spell list doesn't have any Sor/Wiz [Necro] spells that aren't undead or classic curse related until 8th level. The two non-curse, non-undead spells Necro has, Clone and Astral Projection, make very little sense within the context of a spell list that has, untilt that point, focused on creating undead, duplicating undead powers, or striking you deaf, or blind, or sapping your precious vital forces. To fix this, you either need to move a lot of the morality neutral [Necro] spells off the Cleric list, or create a butt-load of morality neutral Sor/Wiz spells.
If you want to play a Good Necromancer, play a Pharasma Cleric.
|
|
In the old 3.0 Mongoose book "Necromancy" they had a lot of really neat ideas for spells that really made a low-level necromancer viable. Ideas included a 1st level "Animate Skeleton" that let you have a humanoid skeleton buddy (but only one at a time), then a 2nd level "Animate Zombie" version (replacing any other undead buddy). This dovetails with Jason's "undead companion" idea if instead of spells these were class abilities. Likewise with the rebuke/command ability. Necromancers absolutely MUST have this ability, otherwise evil clerics are just plain better necromancers.
If the "undead compaion" idea bothers the "white" necromancers out there (and really, who gets into necromancy to be a good guy??), then perhaps an alternative like the wizard's arcane bond can be used. Specfically, instead of a corporeal companion, a necromancer could have a "guardian spirit" that granted a handfull of helpful abilities that scaled with level but were specifically NOT a combat help. Like perhaps an AC boost, a Divination effect, a Guidance effect, etc etc.
Linking an "undead companion" to the caster's familiar is an idea too, perhaps giving it a template or a list of abilities or alternate familiar choices to tie in with the necromancy theme.
|
|
If you want to play a Good Necromancer, play a Pharasma Cleric.
While I agree that a Pharasman Cleric would be a better 'necromancer' than a specialist Necromancer, I don't consider that a selling point, so much as a weakness.
One sacred cow that will never get slaughtered, even though I'd be urging old Bessie towards the chute, would be to allow Wizards to cast some healing spells in the Necromancy school (perhaps at a level higher than the equivalent Cleric spells, to keep the Cleric as the 'best' healer).
|
|
While I agree that a Pharasman Cleric would be a better 'necromancer' than a specialist Necromancer, I don't consider that a selling point, so much as a weakness.
It *is* a weakness of the system, but without completely revamping the Wizard/Sorcerer spell list, a LG Necromancer is either completely boned, or is throwing spells that, well, aren't terribly good.
One sacred cow that will never get slaughtered...
I've wanted to kill that cow from day one of playing D&D.
EDIT: (Also, I can say "boned", but "butt-load" in my previous post gets cartoonized? Buh?)
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I'm not sure I 100% agree that a good necromancer doesn't have good options. Fear spells, chill touch, ray of enfeeblement, false life, spectral hand, etc should not be an issue for a good caster, and even curses should be fine. I'm sure there's more out there, but I don't have the time now to go through the list.
I do agree that the emphasis of the school is on creating and controling undead, which would be more off limits for a good necromancer, but there's still useful stuff there.
Here's my 2 cents on the good/evil necro debate.
How about giving up one of the cleric sacred cows and giving the wizard class IE necro the ability to protect against negative energy. In my last game the cleric was too inexperienced to know her spells and the demons life drained the entire party in like 10 rounds. I couldn't tell her to cast protection from negative energy and it wasn't on the wizard list so we all died. Total Party Kill(TPK)
I think that necromancers of any wizard class should have the ability to protect himself and others from negative energy.
|
|
One sacred cow that will never get slaughtered, would be to allow Wizards to cast some healing spells in the Necromancy school (perhaps at a level higher than the equivalent Cleric spells, to keep the Cleric as the 'best' healer).
Paizo have already dabbled in Wiz/Sor healing spells, refer Pathfinder Chronicles: Gods and Magic (page 7)
Infernal Healing
School: Conjuration (healing) [evil];
Level: Clr 1, Blackguard 1, Sor/Wiz 1 (Asmodeus)
Infernal Healing, Greater
School: Conjuration (healing) [evil];
Level: Clr 4, Blackguard 4, Sor/Wiz 4 (Asmodeus)
Grants fast healing, though of the Conjuration school (not Necro), and note the [evil] descriptor (and spell description for further details). None-the-less, it does indicate a willingness to perhaps consider healing variants for Wiz/Sor spells under specific circumstances.
|
|
It's all about "flavour" ...
In all the discussion so far, I think we've been missing a huge storytelling concept opportunity for *good* necromancers - "I see dead people!", "ghost whisperer".
I do have to wonder how the "good necromancers" of the world would explain "I need your father's corpse!"
Generally speaking, I see dead people doesn't work that way. The player wouldn't be seeking corpses, rather corpses would be seeking out the player.
An incorporeal companion on the other hand I think suits but wouldn't a "Good" necromancer be trying to release it from it's mortal suffering?
Probably, yes, and there-in lies any number of plot hooks - Ghost Whisperer manages to do so with a new episode every week! Instead of controlling mindless undead, you might be able to comprehend the needs of the sentient departed and assist them in overcoming whatever obstacles are holding them to this world. The mechanics might be the same, but the flavour would be expressed differently.
I'm not sure how i respond to someone have their character class decided for them, but i just struggle to think of a reason someone would choose to expose themselves to the torment of visages of the dead.
A player doesn't get their character class decided for them, any more than a player wanting a bloodline gets the Sorcerer class decided for them - the class is merely an expression of their background choice. Don't want to play Sorcerer, then don't choose a bloodline; don't want a Necro, then don't choose to see dead people in your background.
I see dead people is simply a background option that some Necromancers might want to choose to avoid the moral unpleasantness usually associated with animating corpses - though having corpses and spirits attracted to you certainly raises it's own set of problems, the idea is that this opens up role-playing challenges some players might enjoy.
|
|
I'm not sure how i respond to someone have their character class decided for them, but i just struggle to think of a reason someone would choose to expose themselves to the torment of visages of the dead.
That's just a player choice vs. character choice thing. I'm sure very few *characters* would say, 'I'm going to start out as a noble Paladin, fall into despair after a devil's machinations trick me into failing to stop a great massacre, lose my Paladinhood and become a Grey Guard.' but a *player* might think that's a powerful origin story.
Similarly, the vast majority of characters in the game-world would probably not choose to suffer the various terrible fates we uncaring players foist upon them, from backstories involving the terrible deaths of their families at the hands of marauding orcs, to the various getting-eaten-by-monsters, brains-sucked-out-by-mind-flayers, violated-by-ogres, digested-in-the-belly-of-the-Sarnacc-for-1000-years fates that await them...
|
|
I have always seen the Good Necromancer problem as a problem with the spell list, not a problem with the specialist. I know that spells are the subject of a later discussion, and am quite willing to wait until then to toss a handgrenade into the pool. The lack of spells without the evil descriptor is the necromancer's biggest problem. There needs to be spells that undo animations. A Good necromancer is more likely to be out hunting the undead or empathizing with their plight and trying to assist them. They need some tools to accomplish these goals. If the spell list is balanced, then the class will balance out.