Why am I, a world renown necromancer, bothering with raising zombies from peasants? Oooooh, lots of good fiendish reasons.
A) I'm Chaotic Evil, it's what I do for fun on the weekends. :) It's so fiendishly evil, especially the younger zombies. (Yes, I went there)
B) I run a brothel in a remote tower that caters to rich nobles who have kinky tastes. (Yes, I went there).
C) I also made a deal with the gnolls that live nearby, I slaughter every village within a days ride of their territory, and they let me build my new tower right in the center of their territory, so they can be extra defense for me. :)
D) I have a cohort and a bunch of low level necromancer lackeys. I can get a hundred or so low level undead mooks, and then I can send them at the minotaur village in the valley in the mountain and slaughter it, they're powerful, but waves of undead will see to them. Then I have some really nice zombies and skeletons. :)
E) I really really really like making it impossible for those stupid namby pamby white necromancers to do anything. I like making their lives horrible. :)
As to sense motive, psah.
I'm a bone oracle necromancer. I have my charisma pumped to 20 (human), I got a +cha item. I got skill focus bluff, and I got it maxed out. I keep an alignment item on me that makes me seem good (same with the cohort). I bat my pretty blue eyes and talk about how I am an oppressed white necromancer, and even the Paladin eats it up. :)
Ok, so what you mean is you're a stupid necromancer who wastes the material components and HD limit of his animate dead spell on skeletons that have 4 HP (6 if animated in a desecrate spell as proper), a whopping +0 to hit, and 1d4 claw damage. Riiiight.
You make it impossible for the namby pamby white necromancers to do anything, except that they're probably animating beasts and monsters instead of commoners you're killin' for S&Gs, so if you actually encountered one, all your skeletons would just get run down by a herd of 2d6+9 trampling damage which is essentially "auto-dead" for your undead nobodies. Not to mention as a very stupid necromancer, you surround yourself with mooks that can be dropped by a 1st level cleric channeling.
Yet apparently you're also an oracle and pimped out pretending to be one of those white necromancers you're out to get, and foolin' paladins. Riiiight.
Mdt, you have officially described the best example of a fail necromancer as I could have ever asked for. Thank you for showing everyone how it should never be done. ^-^
And yet you send 50 skeletons upon a town and they will flee and panic in a way they would never do if it was 50 orcs or 50 bandits.
There is something very real to be said about mind games and terror such "troops" would cause.
At least orc skeletons are actually worth something. Most orcs are probably warriors, and their bodies are so strong that they actually make very dangerous undead when animated. You animate you some orc warriors into zombies, slap some 2 handed weapons on them (heck a staff would do) and enjoy gratuitous amounts of violence as the 19+ strength undead with 2d8+3 HD and DR 5/slashing charge around and pound stuff into the ground. For poops & giggles, give them reach weapons. Something gets inside their reach, they use their slam attack.
Now those undead would actually be useful for slaughtering a village. Melee with them is nearly suicide for most guards, and they pretty much laugh at ranged attacks from bows, crossbows, and slings.
How about when the townsfolk are screaming "Help me! Help me!" and the necromancer is sitting on his deathly horse saying "Sheesh, I'm not going to hurt any of you... One of these days I'll remember to walk into town on foot."
Meanwhile, the undead are standing in place behind the necromancer, waiting for orders...
Seems kind of stupid for the Paladin to attack in that scenario.
Depends on the scenario and the God. Some codes demand death for all undead, no exceptions. Other's call for the preservation of life, which may mean using the zombies to aid in the defence of the village.
|
At least orc skeletons are actually worth something.
True. I'm not sure I'd waste the onyx on them, but if I had a way to do it without onyx (as an SLA, frex), they'd be do-able in a pinch.
It is weird how these threads tend to insist that paladins aren't always lawful stupid (and, indeed, they shouldn't be), and then go down on their hands and knees to dredge up gross button-pushing straw man 'examples' of necromancer/wizards who are dumber than the zombie grandmas or little kiddie zombie hookers that they are wasting perfectly good onyx animating.
At least orc skeletons are actually worth something.True. I'm not sure I'd waste the onyx on them, but if I had a way to do it without onyx (as an SLA, frex), they'd be do-able in a pinch.
It is weird how these threads tend to insist that paladins aren't always lawful stupid (and, indeed, they shouldn't be), and then go down on their hands and knees to dredge up gross button-pushing straw man 'examples' of necromancer/wizards who are dumber than the zombie grandmas or little kiddie zombie hookers that they are wasting perfectly good onyx animating.
I know, right? I wonder why that is.
Ok, so what you mean is you're a stupid necromancer who wastes the material components and HD limit of his animate dead spell on skeletons that have 4 HP (6 if animated in a desecrate spell as proper), a whopping +0 to hit, and 1d4 claw damage. Riiiight.You make it impossible for the namby pamby white necromancers to do anything, except that they're probably animating beasts and monsters instead of commoners you're killin' for S&Gs, so if you actually encountered one, all your skeletons would just get run down by a herd of 2d6+9 trampling damage which is essentially "auto-dead" for your undead nobodies. Not to mention as a very stupid necromancer, you surround yourself with mooks that can be dropped by a 1st level cleric channeling.
Yet apparently you're also an oracle and pimped out pretending to be one of those white necromancers you're out to get, and foolin' paladins. Riiiight.
Mdt, you have officially described the best example of a fail necromancer as I could have ever asked for. Thank you for showing everyone how it should never be done. ^-^
*sigh* Look at the first sentence of his post.
Why am I, a world renown necromancer, bothering with raising zombies from peasants? Oooooh, lots of good fiendish reasons.
He seems to be answering a question, posed above by other people as to why any high level necromancer would bother with low level undead. The answer being, that he's a rotten evil b@stard who revels in it, wallows in evil, does whatever the h3ll he feels like and is generally nasty. It's the type of thing NPCs, who aren't as centered on "efficiency" as you are, might do. They just live there, they aren't "gaming it".
Ashiel, you really need to get over the condescending language / laughing at posts / posters you disagree with. You've done it a couple of times in this thread. It's kind of childish. You have opinions, and that's fine. Not everyone will agree with you. This doesn't mean they are in any sense inferior to you, the opinions or the posters, and you might want to look a little deeper before you laugh. It can save some embarrasment.
As for your arguments, nothing really new. Reasonably well stated. But, saying you disagree with RAW and that your opinion is better than others and you don't agree with RAW does not constitute a winning argument. It's just an opinion. You seem solidly wedded to modern science, logic and cultural relativism. Fine. A world with magic and absolutes of good and evil in it may, or may not, work the way you expect it to. It will in your own game, no doubt. It may not in others. As many have pointed out.
Sorry if I've been offensive, but, to be blunt, so have you.
He seems to be answering a question, posed above by other people as to why any high level necromancer would bother with low level undead. The answer being, that he's a rotten evil b@stard who revels in it, wallows in evil, does whatever the h3ll he feels like and is generally nasty. It's the type of thing NPCs, who aren't as centered on "efficiency" as you are, might do. They just live there, they aren't "gaming it".
Why am I, a world renown necromancer, bothering with raising zombies from peasants? Oooooh, lots of good fiendish reasons.
That's cool and all, but it kind of breaks verisimilitude if your world renown necromancer doesn't act like one. It's not metagaming, it's common sense. If you were a really powerful world renown necromancer, would you really animate peasants instead of, oh I dunno, big bad monsters? If you're going to dump some 2,000 gold pieces worth of material components into your limited minions, wouldn't you want them to not fall over in a stiff wind?
In short, none of his reasons were very good or made any sense, and I pointed that out.
Ashiel, you really need to get over the condescending language / laughing at posts / posters you disagree with. You've done it a couple of times in this thread. It's kind of childish. You have opinions, and that's fine. Not everyone will agree with you. This doesn't mean they are in any sense inferior to you, the opinions or the posters, and you might want to look a little deeper before you laugh. It can save some embarrasment.
Sorry. I don't intend to come off as condescending. It kind of just happens that way. Disagreeing with me has nothing to do with it, however. If someone disagrees with me, but is backing their junk up with rational evidence rather than coming up with nonsensical babble, then I tend to be very accommodating. I generally try to be very civil, and I know that you will find certain other posters baiting and using mockery far more often, though I haven't seen you call them down for it.
That's cool and all, but if someone says something funny, I'll laugh. If you wanna point out a specific example, and talk about it, I'm listening, 'cause I've never said anyone inferior to me. Again, please include a few other examples of the posters who have willfully been baiting or intentionally misrepresenting arguments, and thank you.
EDIT: Also, why would you think I believe people are inferior to me? Why would they feel inferior to me? I'm just a person, as any other.
As for your arguments, nothing really new. Reasonably well stated. But, saying you disagree with RAW and that your opinion is better than others and you don't agree with RAW does not constitute a winning argument. It's just an opinion. You seem solidly wedded to modern science, logic and cultural relativism. Fine. A world with magic and absolutes of good and evil in it may, or may not, work the way you expect it to. It will in your own game, no doubt. It may not in others. As many have pointed out.
Actually, you misrepresent my stance. I've spoken on behalf of the RAW several times. I have not argued against the RAW. I have noted both what is my opinion and what is the RAW as separate multiple times (though people seem to ignore this). If you have a specific example, please bring it to my attention.
As to modern science and cultural relativism, that's called being a thinking rational person. We play RPGs set in pseudo-medieval settings, in a world with magic faries and shiny dragons. Suggesting that instead of rationality and reasoning that people should try to decide what is right or wrong based on a non-existent standard is akin to suggesting that the Core Rulebook should be written on sheepskins with berries and quills, and bound with a rough hemp binding that was pressed through with a bone needle.
Sorry, it took me awhile to get back, but I just finished working on my World History final. My students will no doubt be thrilled...
That's cool and all, but it kind of breaks verisimilitude if your world renown necromancer doesn't act like one. It's not metagaming, it's common sense. If you were a really powerful world renown necromancer, would you really animate peasants instead of, oh I dunno, big bad monsters? If you're going to dump some 2,000 gold pieces worth of material components into your limited minions, wouldn't you want them to not fall over in a stiff wind?In short, none of his reasons were very good or made any sense, and I pointed that out.
You're assuming the giggling pervert is rational. He didn't seem to be written up that way. People with power can pretty much do as they please. This one is. They don't have to optimize their lives or choices. Just live them. No doubt there are coldly rational individuals making the best choices and others who are not. That's life in any world.
Sorry. I don't intend to come off as condescending. It kind of just happens that way. Disagreeing with me has nothing to do with it, however. If someone disagrees with me, but is backing their junk up with rational evidence rather than coming up with nonsensical babble, then I tend to be very accommodating. I generally try to be very civil, and I know that you will find certain other posters baiting and using mockery far more often, though I haven't seen you call them down for it.
I'm probably managing to sound that way too. Sorry. You're comment on "rational evidence" is telling, to me. If you don't see the point of their argument, if it doesn't meet your criteria for rational, you dismiss it without looking deeper. As with mdt's post. I know that you're not the only one baiting and mocking here. You just managed to be more mocking. That could be a back handed compliment :) As for non-funny laughter:
Hahahaha. Man, that is a complete joke. It doesn't say planar binding, though it does say bind, and it does say subjugate, which does mean to enslave, and it does apparently tick off the elemental since apparently it can go super-berserk and wreak angry havoc on everything around it, ESPECIALLY if you're using a clay golem (probably because it's earthy).That's a great one man, really. "Hey earth elemental, lemme totally shower you with treasures, and then stuff you inside the contraption for eternity while you function as a battery. Welcome to my Matrix, biatch!"
*falls over laughing*
That pretty much sums it up. At times this thread has gotten heated. You just stand out is all. that doesn't excuse others from doing it. Including me. Looking back at my own post, i should have toned it down. Sorry again.
That's cool and all, but if someone says something funny, I'll laugh. If you wanna point out a specific example, and talk about it, I'm listening, 'cause I've never said anyone inferior to me. Again, please include a few other examples of the posters who have willfully been baiting or intentionally misrepresenting arguments, and thank you.EDIT: Also, why would you think I believe people are inferior to me? Why would they feel inferior to me? I'm just a person, as any other.
I'll give you that others did as well. Maybe your arguing "rational" points just makes it jump out more? hard to say.
Actually, you misrepresent my stance. I've spoken on behalf of the RAW several times. I have not argued against the RAW. I have noted both what is my opinion and what is the RAW as separate multiple times (though people seem to ignore this). If you have a specific example, please bring it to my attention.
Perhaps to an extent, I have. The down side of keeping it short. I did not state you didn't know RAW, just that you seem to disagree with it and present your opinion. Which I suppose we all do at one time or another.
As to modern science and cultural relativism, that's called being a thinking rational person. We play RPGs set in pseudo-medieval settings, in a world with magic faries and shiny dragons. Suggesting that instead of rationality and reasoning that people should try to decide what is right or wrong based on a non-existent standard is akin to suggesting that the Core Rulebook should be written on sheepskins with berries and quills, and bound with a rough hemp binding that was pressed through with a bone needle.
No, here we disagree. That's you, the result of history and modern cultural values, as a "rational" 21st century person. Part of roleplaying, imo, is placing yourself in another life, another way of thinking. Not just projecting your modern self into the game world (although that can be fun), but immersing yourself in the differences. I find it curious that anyone thinks a world as different as a typical PF / D&D world is to ours should operate on identical principles. That people should be "just like us" and "science / rational thought / logic" apply to a world of magic and the supernatural. A different style of RPing I suppose. Anyway, that has nothing to do with printing books in the modern world. I like my books, and PDFs, just the way they are, thank you.
Anyway, I've been a little grumpy, singled you out (unfairly) and, in the process, been a bit hypocritical. My apologies.
I'm calling it a night. Loads of students waiting for me tommorow and they'll expect me to be awake. Damn :D
You know it just dawned on me what the greatest necromancer treasure in all the world is.
A working onyx mine.
Sorry. I don't intend to come off as condescending. It kind of just happens that way. Disagreeing with me has nothing to do with it, however. If someone disagrees with me, but is backing their junk up with rational evidence rather than coming up with nonsensical babble, then I tend to be very accommodating. I generally try to be very civil, and I know that you will find certain other posters baiting and using mockery far more often, though I...
You aren't mocking people, exactly, but your arguments thus far have had an overwhelming focus on refutation.
*explains*
Hey man, no worries. We're cool. I do want to comment on one little thing though...
Hahahaha. Man, that is a complete joke. It doesn't say planar binding, though it does say bind, and it does say subjugate, which does mean to enslave, and it does apparently tick off the elemental since apparently it can go super-berserk and wreak angry havoc on everything around it, ESPECIALLY if you're using a clay golem (probably because it's earthy).
That's a great one man, really. "Hey earth elemental, lemme totally shower you with treasures, and then stuff you inside the contraption for eternity while you function as a battery. Welcome to my Matrix, biatch!"
*falls over laughing*
I make no excuses for this one. I'm still laughing at this. The poster tried to pass off the subjugation (enslavement) of sentient creatures for golem creation as something that you kindly ask the elemental to do. That's laughable. I made a joke about it, that pointed out why it was laughable (see the shower you with riches followed by assimilation to matrix), and then I laughed at it some more. :P
In fact, I'm actually still laughing, having re-read it. It just cracks me up. The very mental image of a wizard throwing some gold coins at an earth elemental of all things, and then stuffing it into a golem to function as your slave battery, and then being all like "well I totally paid him for this eternal servitude against its will, so it's legit right?" is kind of priceless. I never would have thought of that in an age, and I think that's why it tickles me so.
You aren't mocking people, exactly, but your arguments thus far have had an overwhelming focus on refutation.
Well when you're in a debate, and someone says something that is arguably false, it's generally a good idea to point out problems in their argument (refuting the statement) while providing evidence (citations or logical formula) and so forth. Most of my RAW comments have been refutations, because some posters continue to argue something is RAW when it isn't.
As for my opinions on the matter outside of RAW, I've discussed them, but kept them separate. In such cases, I've only argued non-RAW logic vs non-RAW logic, and I'd like to think that for the most part I've been very civil in doing so.
You know it just dawned on me what the greatest necromancer treasure in all the world is.
A working onyx mine.
Nope. Onyx fortress. The party necromancer is still working on th massive block of the stuff he carved from his bedroom wall.
I'm not even sure what you're trying to prove anymore mdt. That a paladin can be fooled with enough investment? No contest, a potion of glibness can do that.He seems to be answering the question as to why any high level necromancer would bother with animating skeletons / zombies. And perhaps, indirectly, demonstrating why no one would ever trust anybody who mucks around with dead bodies to be really good...
You win a cupie doll. :)
That's cool and all, but it kind of breaks verisimilitude if your world renown necromancer doesn't act like one. It's not metagaming, it's common sense. If you were a really powerful world renown necromancer, would you really animate peasants instead of, oh I dunno, big bad monsters? If you're going to dump some 2,000 gold pieces worth of material components into your limited minions, wouldn't you want them to not fall over in a stiff wind?
You know what breaks verisimilitude for me? When CE bad guys act like computer controlled villains who put every decision through a program that measures gains vs losses. That's not CE, that's LE. Chaotic Evil is about destruction and chaos, not weighted averages and return on investment.
You also ignore the realism involved. If you look at my post, I said the nasty necromancer had a cohort and a bunch of followers who were also necromancers. Now, followers are all 1-3rd level for the most part. Just what, prey tell, do 1st to 3rd level necromancers use for their zombies? Do they use dragons? Do they use hydras? No, they don't. They use whatever corpse they can find. Could he just dig up the village cemetery for them? Yeah, but where's the fun in that. This kills multiple birds at once. I get to revel in killing a whole town, I get some nice 1st level zombies for the brothel, which my followers will raise up (since they can't do much else) and take back to the tower. Or they take back skeletons to guard it. Either way, the followers each can handle a couple of low level skeletons or zombies. My personal undead minions are likely more powerful, minotaurs or what have you. But even a CE necromancer reserves the good stuff for himself and palms off the cheap stuff on his 1st to 3rd level mooks. Our 15th level necromancer could easily have 30 or 40 1st level mooks, each who can only control a few small undead. But if each one can get 3 villager zombie/skeletons, then that's easily over 100 undead (he has more 2nd and 3rd level followers) fodders to be used against people coming against him. Yeah, your average 15th level PCs will mow through the small fry. But they have to stop to do it. And if there's some really nasty higher level stuff mixed in with them, then the PCs are going to have some difficulty with that many raw bodies. If nothing else, 50 skeletal archers can whittle them down. Even if they need a 20 to hit, they're going to get 2-3 hits a round by the law of averages. If the PCs are wasting resources on all these small fry (healing, potions, scrolls, spells) then they paid for themselves easily.
|
I agree, that's a CE villain.
Ashiel, i like your posts and your opinions, but i think that sometimes you are focusing too much on average damage and other crunchy stuff...maybe you could try a more...organic approach to the game from time to time.
Also, it's not polite to tell people that they are lying, even when they are.
I agree, that's a CE villain.
Ashiel, i like your posts and your opinions, but i think that sometimes you are focusing too much on average damage and other crunchy stuff...maybe you could try a more...organic approach to the game from time to time.
Also, it's not polite to tell people that they are lying, even when they are.
Sure, but necromancers aren't even necessarily evil in the first place.
Also, condescension and being impolite are allowed on this forum. Abuse and insults are not.
I agree, that's a CE villain.
Ashiel, i like your posts and your opinions, but i think that sometimes you are focusing too much on average damage and other crunchy stuff...maybe you could try a more...organic approach to the game from time to time.
Also, it's not polite to tell people that they are lying, even when they are.
Sure, but necromancers aren't even necessarily evil in the first place.
Also, condescension and being impolite are allowed on this forum. Abuse and insults are not.
To Hama: Actually, I think Ashiel has admitted that not all necromancers work intelligently. However, there's something to be said about PC necromancers that will act in such a way that differentiates them from most other necromancers.
To Rocketmail1: A small percentage of necromancers aren't necessarily evil. We can agree on that, I'd hope? Sure, it's entirely possible to create a world where 99% of the necromancers are the equivalent of Funshine Bear and seek to help everyone have fun while undeath does all their heavy lifting, but I think we can all agree that's not the norm for this world.
|
|
Just because something isn't forbidden, doesn't mean that it should be practiced. It's much easier to be condescending and rude to somebody you're not talking to directly, because there is practically nothing that person can do to stop you. I alway approach internet forums with that in mind, and relate to people in a way that i would if we were all at the same table, talking over drinks.
Nobody said they are, but mdt's necromancer clearly is, and i was referring to that one.
Sure, but necromancers aren't even necessarily evil in the first place.
I've played a non-evil necromancer, but then he didn't go around raising undead very often. While there is debate over whether skeletons and zombies are evil, they are animated by negative energy. I view negative energy as like 'moral radioactive waste': dangerous stuff, not exactly evil in and of itself but it can tempt you that way, taint your soul if you will.
People like to see things like radioactive waste handled with great care and caution, and there is a tendency to assume those that do not are either criminally irresponsible or else are up to no good. This is how society perhaps views necromancers: he may not be Evil, but he's still dangerous. You also have to bear in mind that in Golarian, a lot of deities are anti-undead; they are regarded by them as a corruption of the natural order at best by the vast majority of people. To many, anyone who creates undead must be evil, mustn't they? They may not be right, but they feel they are justified.
Ashiel, i like your posts and your opinions, but i think that sometimes you are focusing too much on average damage and other crunchy stuff...maybe you could try a more...organic approach to the game from time to time.
I do, actually. I don't just think about what they do, but why. If someone's talking about a level 15 character, I think about how they got there. It breaks verisimilitude to think that such a necromancer would reach level 15 while being so moronic. Essentially, he seems to be doing so just for poops and giggles, and that sounds a bit more like chaotic stupid to me.
I'm wondering, how did this guy reach level 15? Was he always this dumb, and just for some reason no one ever caught him, despite there being tons of scrying type spells, the ability to track (I'm pretty sure a horde of commoner skeletons leaves a pretty noticeable trail according to the survival rules), and so forth? How did he reach where he was today, is the question I ask.
It's always been my understanding that you don't reach high levels by being stupid. At 5th level it's easy to say "Hah, I'm totally going to slaughter some of these people and then make them into little skeletons and rule the world!" and then you run into a 3rd level cleric who wipes out all your little skeletons in a single Channel Energy burst, and you have to flee from the authorities after you plan went horribly awry.
Necromancer: "Whoa, geeze, that was close! Man, I totally loved slaughtering those innocents, but I need to find something a bit sturdier before I charge into the attack a town again. It's a good thing I picked a town that was too pitiful to defend themselves against a wizard of minor power, or else I'd probably be dead already."
However, I'll say that the necromancer may still want to slaughter commoners and use undead. No problems there. However, that's still kinda dumb, even if he has his own personal motivations behind it. That still makes a bad necromancer.
It's comically evil. "I do evil 'cause it's evil. I don't need a motivation, here's my flaming business card of death."
Also, it's not polite to tell people that they are lying, even when they are.
Sadly, liars will continue to lie unless they realize that they will be called on it. Perhaps it's impolite, but it's very impolite to lie about someone else (it's even a sin in some religions), so we'll call it even.
EDIT: That being said, I do like the children zombies idea. If you're trying to send a message, that would definitely get it across, I think.
Actually in song and story they generally ARE. Most necromancers are folks who have a rather pointed fixation with death. Necromancers who are especially tight with undeath tend to be more along the Xykon mode of thought than Gandalf. While there might be good necromancers, they're generally not the type to raise hordes of undead just because they can. As part of being good is respecting the right of the dead to rest in peace. I would say that if you sampled 100 necromancers, about 60 percent would be evil, 35 some shade of neutrality, and maybe about 5 at best might be of a good alignment, but at least 3 of those would be on the edge.
Traditionally, necromancers are those who conduct divination and magic through the dead. Primarily as a means of divination by communing with the dead. It likewise, by name, suggests any sort of magic that is primarily concerning, focused on, or fueled by, the dead.
Likewise, "As part of being good is respecting the right of the dead to rest in peace" has no place here, because necromancers do not harm or disrupt the rest of those who have passed on, unless they are actually calling the sentient spirit back to the body (as in the case of create undead as detailed in the mummification explanation). Likewise, this statement is fundamentally flawed, as by merely comparing it to a cadaver, we can find that using the body is not in itself evil because no one is being harmed by the action. Likewise, it disregards the fact that such taboos are strictly cultural, and vary from region to region in our own world, and likely would in a fantasy world as well.
Your numbers are nice, but kind of pointless. That's how you see it. I could do the same, and declare that 60% of all evokers are probably evil, 35% of them are neutral, and 5% of them are lying to themselves, and I could actually back it up.
See, unlike necromancy, the vast majority of Evocation spells are entirely destructive, and have few uses beyond destroying and killing. Ray of enfeeblement, ghoul's touch, and fear are ideal methods of disabling enemies rather that outright killing them. Meanwhile, shocking grasp, scorching ray, and fireball are entirely destructive in their nature, both to the living, the dead, and the surroundings. Since destruction and harming are two key aspects of evil, it would appear that only evil people would be drawn towards Evocation, because the iconic spells of the school are capable only of inflicting gratuitous amounts of pain and destruction. Fireball isn't used to light campfires.
Now, evocation has some spells that can be used for good, or at least for your convenience. It has light, continual flame, daylight, and it also has the darkness line of spells, and it has floating disk and the almighty contingency.
However, necromancy has things like animate dead which can create a utopia. It has halt undead to stop rampaging undead. It has gentle repose to prevent things from decaying.
So, yeah, my arbitrary numbers suggest that 60% of evokers are evil, simply because using their spells are innately destructive while ignoring options for disabling or halting foes without killing them, freezing them, burning them to a crisp, or melting them.
However, I myself don't believe evokers are mostly evil, because I do believe that since spells don't dictate alignment, but choice, intent, and use, it depends on the individual.
EDIT: However, if we adhere to TarkXT's view on it, it's actually highly probably that every spellcaster of a certain level has a very evil bent, merely because the scale of their power apparently makes them evil by default if they use it for most anything.
|
|
Sadly, liars will continue to lie unless they realize that they will be called on it. Perhaps it's impolite, but it's very impolite to lie about someone else (it's even a sin in some religions), so we'll call it even.
Well, to be honest, i don't think that calling people liars will make them stop lying. In my personal experience, a liar is unstoppable.
Also, a lvl 15 CE necromancer with a penchant for slaughtering villages will actually bide his time, and lay low (as much as he can) until he sees that most people that come after him die in horrible/unspeakable ways from his magic, and will know that he does not have to hide his urges and true intentions anymore. Then, village slaughtering/mass genocide undead raising begins...
You know what breaks verisimilitude for me? When CE bad guys act like computer controlled villains who put every decision through a program that measures gains vs losses. That's not CE, that's LE. Chaotic Evil is about destruction and chaos, not weighted averages and return on investment.
This is true yet, conversely, chaotic evil need not be played as an utter madman incapable of guile or strategy. I do believe a veritable swarm of Mariliths would be picketing outside your house were this insinutated. :P
This is true yet, conversely, chaotic evil need not be played as an utter madman incapable of guile or strategy. I do believe a veritable swarm of Mariliths would be picketing outside your house were this insinutated. :P
You know what breaks verisimilitude for me? When CE bad guys act like computer controlled villains who put every decision through a program that measures gains vs losses. That's not CE, that's LE. Chaotic Evil is about destruction and chaos, not weighted averages and return on investment.
You'll note I never said he didn't use guile or strategy. IN fact, the very example was chock full of it. Pretending to be a good necromancer, lulling the town into a false sense of security, waiting until he was sure they were relaxed, and then slaughtering them with gleeful laughter. What he didn't do was sit down with an abbacus and decide if it would be better for his low level followers to have 2 orc skeletons or 4 human skeletons or 6 human child zombies or 4 human zombies or 1 orc and 2 human or 1 orc and 1 human and 2 child human zombies.
Ashiel's approach is to have our necromancer sit down with a sliderule and abbacus and decide the exact maximum DPR he can dish out balanced by the average survivability of the undead in question vs both normal folk and adventurers, while taking into account the weather, the season, the availability of onyx, the current price of onyx on the open market, blah, blah, blah.
Now, I'm not saying there aren't necromancers who wouldn't do just that. I could totally see a Mr. Spock type LE necromancer sitting down with a map and an abbacus and a sliderule and creating all sorts of notes comparing undead types vs political stability vs survivability etc.
I just don't see a CE one who revels in spreading evil and death doing it.
This is true yet, conversely, chaotic evil need not be played as an utter madman incapable of guile or strategy. I do believe a veritable swarm of Mariliths would be picketing outside your house were this insinutated. :P
You know what breaks verisimilitude for me? When CE bad guys act like computer controlled villains who put every decision through a program that measures gains vs losses. That's not CE, that's LE. Chaotic Evil is about destruction and chaos, not weighted averages and return on investment.
You'll note I never said he didn't use guile or strategy. IN fact, the very example was chock full of it. Pretending to be a good necromancer, lulling the town into a false sense of security, waiting until he was sure they were relaxed, and then slaughtering them with gleeful laughter. What he didn't do was sit down with an abbacus and decide if it would be better for his low level followers to have 2 orc skeletons or 4 human skeletons or 6 human child zombies or 4 human zombies or 1 orc and 2 human or 1 orc and 1 human and 2 child human zombies.
Ashiel's approach is to have our necromancer sit down with a sliderule and abbacus and decide the exact maximum DPR he can dish out balanced by the average survivability of the undead in question vs both normal folk and adventurers, while taking into account the weather, the season, the availability of onyx, the current price of onyx on the open market, blah, blah, blah.
Now, I'm not saying there aren't necromancers who wouldn't do just that. I could totally see a Mr. Spock type LE necromancer sitting down with a map and an abbacus and a sliderule and creating all sorts of notes comparing undead types vs political stability vs survivability etc.
I just don't see a CE one who revels in spreading evil and death doing it.
The mental image of Mariliths holding picket signs was too amusing to pass up. :P
Well, let me clear this long thread up a little bit. I don't blame Harmor for wanting to bring in a character who can animate some bodyguards. It sounds just like my type of caster. As far as those who say, tell they guy not to play a paladin, I am playing the paladin in question and have been the party for the last 6 months. Harmor didn't want his old character raised. I can probably speak for the party cleric of Sarenrae, as well as my cohort cleric of Sarenrae, that we won't likely accept a stranger into our group with an assortment of undead in tow. Sorry Harmor :(
Yeah,
With this information, I'd say the necromancer character is a no-go. Not only is there a player with a paladin who wouldn't do it, another good cleric who would object is in the party. Add on to that that this is a replacement character for one that died, and you have nothing but a disruptive new character trying to be added to an existing party.There would be no reason at all for an existing group of good characters to allow a necromancer to join, especially if the game world holds necromancy to be evil.
The mental image of Mariliths holding picket signs was too amusing to pass up. :P
No Chaos with representation!
Paladin's unfair to chaotic evil!
Hell No We Won't be Good!
:)
However, if we adhere to TarkXT's view on it, it's actually highly probably that every spellcaster of a certain level has a very evil bent, merely because the scale of their power apparently makes them evil by default if they use it for most anything.
Which is actually not my view at all. I expressed before and I will again then I'll stop beating this horse corpse because it keeps walking away.
Power used recklessly and irresponsibly with zero regards to the consequences to those around them is evil.
However, if we adhere to TarkXT's view on it, it's actually highly probably that every spellcaster of a certain level has a very evil bent, merely because the scale of their power apparently makes them evil by default if they use it for most anything.
Which is actually not my view at all. I expressed before and I will again then I'll stop beating this horse corpse because it keeps walking away.
Power used recklessly and irresponsibly with zero regards to the consequences to those around them is evil.
Anyone who thinks Tark is biased against necromancers or evil characters in general should read his guides and his blogs. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The mental image of Mariliths holding picket signs was too amusing to pass up. :P
No Chaos with representation!
Paladin's unfair to chaotic evil!
Hell No We Won't be Good!
:)
Along with speeches about how they do all the planning, analysis, and strategy and Balors get all the credit. :P
|
Necromancer: "Whoa, geeze, that was close! Man, I totally loved slaughtering those innocents, but I need to find something a bit sturdier before I charge into the attack a town again. It's a good thing I picked a town that was too pitiful to defend themselves against a wizard of minor power, or else I'd probably be dead already."
Fun things for a necromancer to do next include the creation of flesh golems (since I honestly think he's gona get his booty kicked trying to kill some of the more threatening animals.)
|
Moral of the Story (Choose all that apply):
- Don't Fail at Teamwork Forever. If you're a necromancer and the party's paladin thinks undead are icky and not kosher, then don't raise the dead as undead. If you're the paladin and there's a necromancer in the party, try to cut him a little slack.
- Don't Trust Necromancers.
- Evokers and Enchanters Might be Evil, Too.
- If You're an Evil Necromancer, Leave the Scrub Corpses for Followers. Also, consider throwing some flesh golems into the mass of zombies you have, getting some living giants, trolls, or minotaurs to follow you and animate those corpses when they die in glorious combat against your enemies.
- Don't Park Your Undead Horse in the Handicapped Spot. Being animated from the dead does not count, and the local law enforcement will not think your jokes about it are funny. In fact, it's probably a good idea to keep ALL your undead away from towns that you don't intend to murder. Especially if the town doesn't know who you are.
- Killing Towns Isn't Funny. No matter how your evil necromancer feels about it, bringing undead along and then making jokes about 'pretending to murder' the common folk will probably not go over well with the party's paladin.
Removed some posts - please post civilly, thanks!