|
Mikaze,
Something I'm still homebrewing that might work for you:Animate Juju
Prerequisites: Spell Focus (Necromancy), Knowledge (Religion): 3, one of Command Undead, Turn Undead, Undead Bloodline, Sanguine bloodline
Benefit: Undead you animate are not inherently evil. Mindless undead are neutral and intelligent undead are your alignment. Spells creating undead lose the [Evil] descriptor for you.
I was about to say it may make it too available and lessen the Juju Oracle and White Necromancers specialness, but then I looked at all the prereqs. ;) On the choice of Sanguine bloodline, did you see that as the caster putting some of their infectious heritage into their work?
It definitely helps get the Juju-goodness out of just the Mwangi Expanse alone if reflavoring that mystery isn't available.
After all, why should just juju Oracles get all the fun?
Fully agreed on that count. :)
|
|
Meanwhile I as a GM would let the undead come back as either the alignment the undead had in life or the alignment of the caster if I didn't really have one thought up but would then have the undeads alignment degrade back to what is expected of the undead as their cravings, addictions, and compulsions begun to take hold and corrupt them back.
I play up the addiction aspect for "vanilla" undead, those that have cravings at least, but personally I don't see that necessarily being the case for WN/JO-risen undead, especially those the white necromancer makes. While I would still (generally, allowing for exceptions) see the their undead as being cosmically unnatural and thus having some issues, I don't think undead risen with the WN/JO-purified necromancy would have inborn cravings that always pushed towards evil, especially given the flavor of the two classes. Otherwise it becomes a gamble with someone's soul. (white necros actually can cast [Evil} versions of undead making spells before they're capable of purified raisings, but they're presented as being incredibly loathe to do so)
That's the big reason why I was thinking about undead variants for WN/JO's to raise. If a type of undead fundamentally has some craving or urge at the core of their being that is inherently evil, I figure a WN/JO is going to need to raise something with a different nature, like the devourer variants.
Not to say that non-evil WN/JO undead couldn't fall towards evil, though. I just figure it would be because of human(oid) failings and weakness rather than direct supernatural corruption. IMO, and all that. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meanwhile I as a GM would let the undead come back as either the alignment the undead had in life or the alignment of the caster if I didn't really have one thought up but would then have the undeads alignment degrade back to what is expected of the undead as their cravings, addictions, and compulsions begun to take hold and corrupt them back.
I play up the addiction aspect for "vanilla" undead, those that have cravings at least, but personally I don't see that necessarily being the case for WN/JO-risen undead, especially those the white necromancer makes. While I would still (generally, allowing for exceptions) see the their undead as being cosmically unnatural and thus having some issues, I don't think undead risen with the WN/JO-purified necromancy would have inborn cravings that always pushed towards evil, especially given the flavor of the two classes. Otherwise it becomes a gamble with someone's soul. (white necros actually can cast [Evil} versions of undead making spells before they're capable of purified raisings, but they're presented as being incredibly loathe to do so)
That's the big reason why I was thinking about undead variants for WN/JO's to raise. If a type of undead fundamentally has some craving or urge at the core of their being that is inherently evil, I figure a WN/JO is going to need to raise something with a different nature, like the devourer variants.
Not to say that non-evil WN/JO undead couldn't fall towards evil, though. I just figure it would be because of human(oid) failings and weakness rather than direct supernatural corruption. IMO, and all that. :)
While there are a few types of undead that seem like they must be inherently evil, most undead created via the create undead spells don't seem this way. For example, Morgues in D&D can "naturally" rise from serial killers and such, but create undead likewise doesn't require the person being raised to be a serial killer at all. Same with ghouls, who again "naturally" rise from evil cannibals according to their lore, but who can be created via create undead once again, even if the person was a vegetarian. :P
I have seriously railed against the whole undead = Auto-Evil thing since it got started mid-3E. When 3E launched, it was much more intelligent and rational about its alignments, and creatures with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher were the only creatures to have alignments (because they were the only ones capable of making moral decisions), and things like Lemures (who are mindless) had the Evil subtype (so they were still treated as evil creatures for essentially being mindless golems composed of raw evil).
In 3E, mindless undead were always Neutral, along with golems, vermin, and so forth. This made sense. It also was supported by the D&D cosmologies and such, which specifically called out negative energy as being an entirely neutral energy, which was the energy of death, with positive energy being the energy of life. Humorously, too much positive energy will kill you, and too much negative energy can turn you into an undead. Ironically, negative energy is less destructive in large quantities than positive energy, because Undead are basically in heaven on the Negative Energy Plane, while being alive on the positive energy plane can literally cause you to super nova from too much energy.
My biggest beef with the whole evil undead thing is it directly contradicts the other 80% of the game. I mean, you take a neutral object (a corpse), stuff some neutral energy into it (negative energy), and magically control it (also neutral given other examples of things like golems, unseen servants, etc), and yet somehow this thing which has A) no soul, B) no mind, C) no free will, is somehow of Evil alignment. W. T. F.
Meanwhile, every example that anyone can come up with as to why it's evil is either 100% made up, or can be proven wrong by referencing anything else in the book. Some say it traps the souls of dead creature, but the spell says nothing of the sort, and you can animate bodies which never had souls to begin with, or animate the body of people who have been given a new body and their old body remains. Disproven. Likewise, some say that the act of channeling negative energy into the world is evil, but this is provably false because 80-90% of the entire Necromancy school does this with virtually every spell, and spells like inflict light wounds aren't Evil either.
Hell, even the mummy stat block sounds completely backasswards when you read how mummies are typically made. I mean, it goes into great detail about how they are carefully and sacredly embalming the body, filling it with incense and dried flowers, anointing them in sacred oils, wrapping them with holy blessed linens, etc, etc, etc. Then it basically says they cast create undead and BAM, bad guy. Again, "W. T. F."?
That's another thing that bugs me. Mummies in real-world mythology are not evil creatures. In fact, they're pretty awesome theoretically. Making them all Evil is about as good of an idea as suggesting Jesus immediately became Chaotic Evil 'cause he sprang back to life magically. I mean, we Christians essentially worship a zombie by the World English Dictionary, which describes a zombie as a supernatural spirit that reanimates a dead body, and honestly, I can see that. We worship a guy who was supposed to have magic powers and such, is executed, then comes back to life in a few days good as new. I'm sure I could think of at least one thing in D&D that fits that description. Not trying to be sacrilegious noting that certain things feel oddly familiar, just pointing out that some of us might take it in a different way.
Perhaps it's just the role-player in me, but honestly, I really hate auto-alignments. I prefer motivations, character development, and such things as free will and what-not. I prefer badguys that are evil because they're evil, not just because they're powered by a different energy than I am. These black & white alignments leave me feeling a little less like a tabletop RPG and a little more something else. I mean, I think that suggested alignments are entirely fine. I mean, sure, most ghouls, morgues, and liches are probably bad guys; what with their supposedly popping up from either being too selfish in life that they wouldn't even pass into the next world, or because not dying looks like a great idea when you're going to hell anyway (which if you're a lich, is only a phone-call away to see if you're going to hell or not). Few things in life are absolute, and absolutes make the game feel very false (at least to me).
It's for this reason that it confuses me as to why James Jacobs, who has posted in this thread and others lately, who has noted that he believes the rules exist to tell a story, would then turn and support rules that actually hinder good stories. I had actually hoped that since Paizo wasn't gobbled up by Hasbro (when I noticed the changes to the logic involving the D&D game) that they wouldn't be afraid to make things in the game that were scary, creepy, or ugly, that weren't innately evil and shallower than a spoon of water.
Creative Director
|
It's for this reason that it confuses me as to why James Jacobs, who has posted in this thread and others lately, who has noted that he believes the rules exist to tell a story, would then turn and support rules that actually hinder good stories. I had actually hoped that since Paizo wasn't gobbled up by Hasbro (when I noticed the changes to the logic involving the D&D game) that they wouldn't be afraid to make things in the game that were scary, creepy, or ugly, that weren't innately evil and shallower than a spoon of water.
I don't support alignment and always-evil undead because of the rules. As a matter of fact... I think that always-evil undead make for BETTTER stories.
Note that my maintaining that undead (with the exception of some ghosts) are always evil does NOT preclude us doing an adventure or story about a non-evil undead. In fact, I maintain my stance that undead are evil precisely BECAUSE we might want to do a story like that some day... and a story like that is much more impactful and interesting if the fact that undead are always evil is already established and well-documented.
Look at Driz'zt. Before "The Crystal Shard," the concept of a good-aligned drow was pretty alien, and even though some DID exist here and there, they were very obscure. The drow in print up until that time were demon worshiping sadists, through and through.
But then, Salvatore came along with Driz'zt and that character was INSANELY popular. Partially because of the fact that it was a new way to look at drow. And since then... look at how drow are regarded today. There's even good-aligned drow deities. And know what? I actually LIKE that—Eilistraee (the good drow deity in question) is my favorite Forgotten Realms deity, in fact. But at the same time... I also really like drow as bad guys. Which is partially why we tried "Second Darkness," as an attempt to "reset" the drow as bad guys. Turns out, that AP was one of our least popular ones, for several reasons... but one of those is that people aren't as into drow as bad guys anymore.
I don't want that to happen to undead in Golarion... and I also want the "breakout non-evil undead" when it DOES happen to be memorable and as awesome as possible. And that requires that character, if and when the character ever comes along, to emerge from an established "undead are evil" framework.
But for now... undead being evil is not the way it is because the rules are that way. They're evil because that happens to be the kind of stories I want Golarion to tell.
For now.
I don't support alignment and always-evil undead because of the rules. As a matter of fact... I think that always-evil undead make for BETTTER stories.
Note that my maintaining that undead (with the exception of some ghosts) are always evil does NOT preclude us doing an adventure or story about a non-evil undead. In fact, I maintain my stance that undead are evil precisely BECAUSE we might want to do a story like that some day... and a story like that is much more impactful and interesting if the fact that undead are always evil is already established and well-documented.
Look at Driz'zt. Before "The Crystal Shard," the concept of a good-aligned drow was pretty alien, and even though some DID exist here and there, they were very obscure. The drow in print up until that time were demon worshiping sadists, through and through.
But then, Salvatore came along with Driz'zt and that character was INSANELY popular. Partially because of the fact that it was a new way to look at drow. And since then... look at how drow are regarded today. There's even good-aligned drow deities. And know what? I actually LIKE that—Eilistraee (the good drow deity in question) is my favorite Forgotten Realms deity, in fact. But at the same time... I also really like drow as bad guys. Which is partially why we tried "Second Darkness," as an attempt to "reset" the drow as bad guys. Turns out, that AP was one of our least popular ones, for several reasons... but one of those is that people aren't as into drow as bad guys anymore.
I don't want that to happen to undead in Golarion... and I also want the "breakout non-evil undead" when it DOES happen to be memorable and as awesome as possible. And that requires that character, if and when the character ever comes along, to emerge from an established "undead are evil" framework.
But for now... undead being evil is not the way it is because the rules are that way. They're evil because that happens to be the kind of stories I want Golarion to tell.
For now.
Those are very good points. Eilistraee is also my favorite goddess in the Forgotten Realms as well (even for some non-drow characters). I do still wish the rules reflected these things a bit better though.
What I mean is, take those drow for example. Hard core badguys. But are the evil because they're drow, or are they evil because they're evil? When I was reading Homeland, I definitely got the feeling for the second. If I'm fighting an enemy in a game, and they're evil, I'd rather it be because of who they are, not because of what they are.
Perhaps I just miss the way that 3E did it which seemed far more reasonable to me. Alignment seemed a lot more logical, and less arbitrary then. We still had tons of evil undead, evil orcs, evil drow, for things that had sentience. But you had a few good ones too, like Baelnorn/Archliches, or your Drizzt types who realize what they know is wrong; and the rules didn't conflict with anything.
I seriously blame Hasbro. Wizards being bought out by Hasbro was the moment I noticed a lot of stuff changing to become problematic. You didn't get these types of forum posts back in 3E on the WotC Boards (at least not with near frequency as with 3.5/PF).
Pathfinder is also used to run other campaign settings, as it has heralded itself as the replacement for 3.5. It's obvious that there is a call for these things, so it would be nice if we got some options for some of these things now and then. I mean, look how happy the Juju Oracle has made people. Look how many people were interested in trying to roleplay a Lawful Good Paladin in Cheliax, and the heavy considerations that would entail.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
SINCE James said it...
Favorite FR deities (alphabetical): Eilistraee, Mystra (), Red Knight, Sharess, Torm, Uluitu!
More semi-on-topic:
James, I think one of the problems is that Golarion and its canon is often getting confused with Pathfinder and its cannon. And that's a pretty big problem, because Golarion is a setting (the central one, granted, but still) while Pathfinder is not.
One of the things I'm thankful for is your constant reminder "this is how canon is, but this is not necessarily how you should play your home games" when you say this stuff. THAT SAID, I'm also very thankful that stuff like the Juju Oracle "slips through" and gets official publication. Even the (semi-ridiculous) paladin of Asmodeus! That stuff is role-playing gold, and I really think that something of that should be integrated more into the Core RAW, while the things like "undead are always evil" are tied more to Golarion (and noting that all spells that created undead in any way automatically gain the [evil] descriptor).
Really, I think that would solve most of your problems at Paizo with the fanbase.
Seriously, I know you need to think page count. I get that. But when you open up the Inner Sea Guide, have a note that clarifies, "In Golarion..." and make those notes clear and obvious (x: every cleric needs a single deity, paladins never have evil patrons, undead are evil). This actually allows you to be more liberal with your Core RAW and have more control with your Campaign Setting at the same time.
Also, don't be afraid of "metagame" terms in your setting books. One of the things I've noticed is that often the setting-stuff seems (comparatively) rules-light. Which is fine! You provide stat-blocks for creatures and such, but they seem downplayed, at least in the organization compared to other Setting books I've seen. But if you want Golarion to stand out... you'll need to deal with that, but making the Core RAW match Golarion-specific isn't the way to go - the opposite happens, and then you get threads like "But in the CORE RAW it says..." all the time.
Anyhoo, those are some suggestions for you guys to ruminate over for the next publication of the books. It may help immensely. Might not! But I think it will. It helped me get a handle on things like Faerun when I read the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, or Eberron when I read the Eberron Campaign Setting.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **
More semi-on-topic:
James, I think one of the problems is that Golarion and its canon is often getting confused with Pathfinder and its cannon. And that's a pretty big problem, because Golarion is a setting (the central one, granted, but still) while Pathfinder is not.
One of the things I'm thankful for is your constant reminder "this is how canon is, but this is not necessarily how you should play your home games" when you say this stuff. THAT SAID, I'm also very thankful that stuff like the Juju Oracle "slips through" and gets official publication. Even the (semi-ridiculous) paladin of Asmodeus! That stuff is role-playing gold, and I really think that something of that should be integrated more into the Core RAW, while the things like "undead are always evil" are tied more to Golarion (and noting that all spells that created undead in any way automatically gain the [evil] descriptor).
Really, I think that would solve most of your problems at Paizo with the fanbase.
Seriously, I know you need to think page count. I get that. But when you open up the Inner Sea Guide, have a note that clarifies, "In Golarion..." and make those notes clear and obvious (x: every cleric needs a single deity, paladins never have evil patrons, undead are evil). This actually allows you to be more liberal with your Core RAW and have more control with your Campaign Setting at the same time.
Also, don't be afraid of "metagame" terms in your setting books. One of the things I've noticed is that often the setting-stuff seems (comparatively) rules-light. Which is fine! You provide stat-blocks for creatures and such, but they seem downplayed, at least in the organization compared to other Setting books I've seen. But if you want Golarion to stand out... you'll need to deal with that, but...
100% +1 on this. I think that this actually hits on the root of the consternation that gives rise to this sort of discussion.
The undead are fuel for great stories because most fit neatly into the eerie valley in monster-creep factor. This is further heightened by the fact that intelligent undead have (often skewed) emotions. Give a party a monster that regrets its crimes, but fails to rise above its terrible urges, and you've got a memorable encounter that will touch your players emotionally, no matter the outcome.
As such, I like to play my intelligent undead like I would play Darth Vader. That way its more moving when he does redeem himself, and sets your players up with a feeling of respect for any redeemed undead they meet in future sessions.
|
As such, I like to play my intelligent undead like I would play Darth Vader. That way its more moving when he does redeem himself, and sets your players up with a feeling of respect for any redeemed undead they meet in future sessions.
My concern with 'always evil' undead is that a dead paladin could get smacked with create undead, and, per the rules, his *soul* now becomes evil, quite possibly being ripped out of heaven, and sent straight to hell after the ghoul, shadow, wight, wraith, whatever he was turned into is destroyed.
And then there's Classic Horrors Revisited, which states that *animate dead* can do this, rip souls out of the upper planes (or rescue them from the lower planes, even if they sold their souls via infernal contracts!). I'm pretty sure James has said that this is not the way it's supposed to work in Golarion, but it's a common enough extension of the 'undead are evil because...' logic that it ends up needing to be refuted in the first place, since even people *writing for Paizo* think that's what was intended.
I'm not the world's biggest fan of Pharasma, true, but I think she, and Iomedae, and Asmodeus, all have a firm enough grip on the soul's of their followers that they can stop create undead (or animate dead) from ripping people out of heaven (or hell) and changing their alignment willy-nilly *by casting a spell.*
A tragic ghost story about a parent who refuses to move on, and, under the aegis of 'protecting' their children, ends up terrorizing them and killing / driving off people they regard as threats (including potential mates, etc.), turning their loved one's lives into a waking nightmare, and unable to process that they are doing more harm than good, until someone can use diplomacy to show them exactly what they are doing, seems more compelling to me than, 'someone cast a spell, and now the soul of Sister Connie Francis, the nicest nun that ever nunned, arbitrarily hates the living, for, like, no reason at all.'
See, Set, I basically agree with you, buuuuuuuuuuuuut...
I'd say sufficiently high powered magic could probably do exactly that. But is a fourth level spell (animate dead), "sufficiently high powered" enough? The thing is, in order to accurately gauge whether or not that kind of thing is likely/possible, one has to set a baseline "standard" for the power level of a campaign world. And - on the forums at least - there is no such solid consensus. See wish-level stuff literally alters reality to suit you better. But what point is the "mortal" limit?
The Alexandrian article Calibrating Your Expectations (which doesn't, despite the arguments against it, say you shouldn't play higher power) suggests that 5th or 6th level is the top of normal "human" ability (relatively speaking, compared to our world) in game. In which case, actually attaining the level seven necessary to cast fourth level spells: whoa, you just ascended to super-human!
But it's not really treated like such. It's treated like "oh, hey, you're seventh level now. Good for you. I remember my younger-levels too. Heh, little adventurers growing up so fast." That's why it feels cheap - fourth level isn't even half-way to the top (and also makes for some pretty lousy servants)!
And, given the correct fluff (as in, describing what, exactly, happens when one cast such spells) I can easily see the [evil] descriptor added to a spell like that. But I can't see the [evil] descriptor at the spells most basic form, because that means there's a flaw in reality (and magic itself) somewhere, and that is a large and nasty can of worms waiting to happen, begging questions from "what is the nature of alignment" (and what is its source) to "what is the nature of magic" (and its source) and "why are certain things 'inherently evil'" and whatnot and so on.
ANYHOO.
Mikaze, you're the OP. We kind of got off track somewhere. Do you have any other concepts/builds you'd like to ask about? Or should we continue discussing this stuff? I don't want to totally derail this thread!
|
Creative Director
|
As such, I like to play my intelligent undead like I would play Darth Vader. That way its more moving when he does redeem himself, and sets your players up with a feeling of respect for any redeemed undead they meet in future sessions.My concern with 'always evil' undead is that a dead paladin could get smacked with create undead, and, per the rules, his *soul* now becomes evil, quite possibly being ripped out of heaven, and sent straight to hell after the ghoul, shadow, wight, wraith, whatever he was turned into is destroyed.
A paladin turned into an undead creature is not a paladin turned evil... it's the paladin's REMAINS turned evil, which is an of itself a pretty vile event. If the undead paladin is slain and then his soul is either allowed to go on to the Boneyard or he's resurrected, he'll be fine.
The only way he wouldn't be fine is if the dead paladin turned undead because of some choice he made—Lord Soth is a great example of this type of event.
But a dead paladin being animated by create undead is no more at risk of losing his paladinhood than a paladin hit with dominate person from a demon. Which opens its own can of worms, probably...
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin turned into an undead creature is not a paladin turned evil... it's the paladin's REMAINS turned evil, which is an of itself a pretty vile event. If the undead paladin is slain and then his soul is either allowed to go on to the Boneyard or he's resurrected, he'll be fine.As such, I like to play my intelligent undead like I would play Darth Vader. That way its more moving when he does redeem himself, and sets your players up with a feeling of respect for any redeemed undead they meet in future sessions.My concern with 'always evil' undead is that a dead paladin could get smacked with create undead, and, per the rules, his *soul* now becomes evil, quite possibly being ripped out of heaven, and sent straight to hell after the ghoul, shadow, wight, wraith, whatever he was turned into is destroyed.
So you're saying that a Paladin, who is turned into a Ghoul, isn't actually evil, but his body is evil, but lacks the Evil subtype that is possessed by creatures who are made out of evil? If so, then why is his body evil, when you can quite easily have a ghost who is not only not evil but is quite benign (as has been the cast in at least one Adventure Path)?
But a dead paladin being animated by create undead is no more at risk of losing his paladinhood than a paladin hit with dominate person from a demon. Which opens its own can of worms, probably...
I must say that this seems very reasonable. I don't really see how the Paladin's animated body is evil, but it does make good sense that the Paladin's soul would be his own. Oh, this also opens up a very real possibility of an organization where Paladins are infused with supernatural power to deal with particularly dangerous foes no one else can.
EXAMPLE: The Paladin of a Lawful Neutral God (which is legal for Paladins to have as a god) dies a horrible death and is brought back to the temple of his god, where the Lawful Neutral clerics therein look at his body.
Cleric #1: "It seems our brother Aslander has fallen in battle before his time of service has been at hand. He was one of the greatest, with a pure heart, and a strong will. Out of duty of service, we shall call him back as a hunter."
Cleric #2: "A hunter? Hmm, it is a custom rarely done, but it is sometimes necessary. Do you believe that he has the spiritual fortitude to make proper use of the gift?"
Cleric #1: "I do. He tempered his soul with the oaths of his order. If not a Paladin, who else can we trust to become a hunter and act responsibly? That is why we only preform this ritual for our Paladins. They are strong enough in the spirit to use it wisely."
Cleric #2: "I see. I just wondered. I had heard of the hunters, and I've heard of the ritual whispered of, but I have never seen anyone preform it, or the hunters themselves."
Cleric #1: "That is because it is rare, and not taken lightly. But come. It is time that we see our old friend again, and for you to see the ritual first hand."
Cleric #1: "Now behold. We shall create a warrior who cannot be touched by the servants of darkness. He shall fear no demon's gaze, nor vampire's bite, nor the cold touch of the shadow. He will hunt them as one of their own, with the soul of the purist champion."
Paladin: "Ugh...Father Anden...where...where am I?"
Anden (Cleric #1): "You have been called back to serve, Aslander. You are in the shadow chamber deep beneath the sacred temple."
Aslander: "I...I am to be a hunter?"
Anden: "Yes, my son. We can entrust this power only to those who have the good will to use it responsibly. Come with me. We have much to talk about. We will need to get you some new clothes, discuss your new life as a hunter...and we will need to get you something to eat..."
And so Aslander the Human Paladin rises again as Aslander the Ghast Paladin. Not returned to the world through cannibalistic urges or selfish refusal to die, but through magic of the Lawful Neutral god of Justice, to act as a hunter of those who would abuse the powers of darkness. The church keeps the hunters around because they realized long ago, that the most effective way to fight the undead, was in fact with the undead. Now Aslander will join his old comrade Kelgorn Firebrand, whom he presumed dead, as they travel the world in guise of normal humans (maybe with the Civilized Ghoulishness feat) and hunting evil shadows, wights, plague zombies, wraiths, vampires, ghouls, and morgues...
|
|
Mikaze, you're the OP. We kind of got off track somewhere. Do you have any other concepts/builds you'd like to ask about? Or should we continue...
Eh, I was just going to post more variants and additional Golarion flavor support for WN/JOs when I had time between work and the orc project. To be honest, this thread was pretty much bound for derailing as soon as the second reply was posted.
|
Creative Director
|
So you're saying that a Paladin, who is turned into a Ghoul, isn't actually evil, but his body is evil, but lacks the Evil subtype that is possessed by creatures who are made out of evil? If so, then why is his body evil, when you can quite easily have a ghost who is not only not evil but is quite benign (as has been the cast in at least one Adventure Path)?
Nope; I'm saying that a paladin turned into a ghoul is actually an evil ghoul. He doesn't retain the paladin class, in this case (no one does, really, when they become a ghoul); if he DID, thoguh (say he got turned into a vampire) he would become an ex-paladin during the duration of his undead existence. If the undead is destroyed and the paladin resurrected, then he gets to be a paladin again... although if this happened in a game I was running or it was a paladin I was playing... I'd like it if that paladin had some crisises of faith and maybe sought out atonement and the like... cause that's dramatic.
Undead generally don't gain the Evil subtype at all, so that's not an issue.
As for why ghosts can be non-evil more often... that's 100% due to my own preference. And being in charge of the setting means I get to make that call. Why is my preference like that? Because of ALL the undead stories I've read/watched/seen (and trust me, being a fan of horror since the late 70s when my dad and I first started watching Creature Features together, I've seen and read plenty of horror), the ones that I felt were generally the most interesting were the ones where the undead creatures were indeed evil. The only real exceptions being several ghost stories where the ghosts weren't actually evil. Beyond that, I can really only think of three other examples that come to mind: both for vampires. Near Dark, Underworld, and True Blood both have non-evil vampires... but even in those cases, the evil vampires outnumber the non-evil ones.
So, as a result of spending about 35 years being exposed to horror stories and not really encountering a heck of a lot of "good undead who aren't ghosts" stories... Golarion ended up the same way.
(I reserve the right to have forgotten about an entertaining non-evil undead... and no, the "revenge from beyond the grave" plot for undead doesn't count, since that can be interpreted as easily as evil as it can good).
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And as a quick expansion from my last post:
I reserve the right to change my mind. If a good enough writer comes along and wants to write an adventure or novel revolving around a non-evil or good undead, then I'll let him/her do that. Because that's what the role of such a creature should be—the focus of an adventure or novel.
That actually meshes quite well with a PC, actually... by that definition, a good enough roleplayer COULD play a non-evil undead in a game I run... but that brings with it very real game balance concerns.
When I say "all undead are evil," in other words, I'm talking about the 99% of them that will be showing up in the roles of antagonists in a Golarion product.
I'm immediately reminded of the revenant from the OG Fiend Folio. This was used to good effect in old dungeon magazines, and brought up to date in the first of the APs.
I think there is a small niche for undead created when truly horrible events happen to Good people, causing restless spirits trying to correct past events. But a Good lich? Or Good ghoul? Nah.
I've been thinking about the nature of "The Planes", and thinking if Positive and Negative energy planes should have any alignment at all. Man, I got to stop reading gaming magazines from the 80's.
|
Creative Director
|
I'm immediately reminded of the revenant from the OG Fiend Folio. This was used to good effect in old dungeon magazines, and brought up to date in the first of the APs.
I think there is a small niche for undead created when truly horrible events happen to Good people, causing restless spirits trying to correct past events. But a Good lich? Or Good ghoul? Nah.
I've been thinking about the nature of "The Planes", and thinking if Positive and Negative energy planes should have any alignment at all. Man, I got to stop reading gaming magazines from the 80's.
And frankly, the idea that when a really bad thing happens to a good person and turns them into a revenant that they're transformed into something evil (revenants in Pathfinder ARE evil) makes the power of the story all that greater and more compelling.
|
If I can chime in here ...
I wrote the White Necromancer class in Kobold Quarterly #19 so obviously I am in the 'occasionally it's OK to have non-evil undead' camp.
However, I absolutely love and respect the heck out of Paizo and what they've done with the Pathfinder RPG and with Golarion. I have no problem at all with James deciding that undead are always evil (or, at least 99% of them :) in Golarion. I completely respect Paizo's desire to make decisions that they feel make their world feel unique. I don't think it's very productive to argue about if that decision is right or not. Bottom line is, the official stance is that Golarion's undead are evil and that's cool with me.
The reality is, we are each free to make that call the way we see fit in our own games. Some people use Golarion as their home campaign setting and they each are free to follow the Paizo choice or not. I'm sure James will not come to your house and shut your game down if you allow White Necromancers to exist in your version of Golarion :) Others use a home brew setting and can make whatever choice regarding undead alignment they like.
I guess I just think we are putting too much emphasis on this one thing. If you want to use White Necromancer, or have good aligned undead from time to time, there's no reason not to - it's your game!
Hopefully the class I have coming out in the next issue of Kobold Quarterly will contribute to less controversy :)
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not only will I not come to your house to shut down your game if I hear you're allowing good aligned undead... but I don't even know where you live!
I do hope, though, that folks understand when I say things like "No evil undead" or "clerics worship only one deity" that I'm talking about the baseline assumption of Golarion... not how Golarion works in any one person's campaign (including my own).
Nope; I'm saying that a paladin turned into a ghoul is actually an evil ghoul.
James, if you bring the Paladin back as a ghoul, it is a sentient undead. Even if he loses all of his class levels and would have to regain them again, exactly how does the Paladin which still has free will, and sentience, turn Evil?
And if your answer is because it's no longer the Paladin, let me ask you this. Who is it? There is nothing about creating, trapping, stealing, binding, or any other thing which would grant the ghoul sentience (a soul).
|
Creative Director
|
A paladin ghoul carries on the paladin's personality. Think of it as the same way as if a paladin goes crazy because he gets rabies or mad cow disease or some similar ailment that causes a personality change. The paladin is, in this case, not in his right mind.
Unless the paladin willfully allowed himself to be transformed into a ghoul because he WANTED to become a ghoul, though, upon being restored to life, it's similar to the domination situation. Or insanity. The paladin wasn't willfully doing the evil acts, and so gets his powers back. But he'll probably feel guilty anyway since that's what paladins do.
Of course... it's sort of a moot point since paladins are pretty quickly immune to ghoul fever anyway since it's a disease...
In any case... when a known character is transformed into a ghoul, it's probably important to spend some time making that part of the story mean something. Similar to what we did in "Skinsaw Murders."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A paladin ghoul carries on the paladin's personality. Think of it as the same way as if a paladin goes crazy because he gets rabies or mad cow disease or some similar ailment that causes a personality change. The paladin is, in this case, not in his right mind.
Unless the paladin willfully allowed himself to be transformed into a ghoul because he WANTED to become a ghoul, though, upon being restored to life, it's similar to the domination situation. Or insanity. The paladin wasn't willfully doing the evil acts, and so gets his powers back. But he'll probably feel guilty anyway since that's what paladins do.
Of course... it's sort of a moot point since paladins are pretty quickly immune to ghoul fever anyway since it's a disease...
In any case... when a known character is transformed into a ghoul, it's probably important to spend some time making that part of the story mean something. Similar to what we did in "Skinsaw Murders."
The biggest problem I have with this is that it appears to be just being made up off the top of your head, with no real reasoning behind it; unless you specifically mean being turned into a ghoul via ghoul fever, which specifically removes their abilities and causes them to act as described in the ghoul entry. However, it is possible to become a ghoul without ever contracting ghoul fever. A disease immune Paladin, upon being killed, can be the subject of a create undead spell to turn it into a ghoul without contracting ghoul fever and the drawbacks it has.
Now in most cases, I imagine it would probably be an evil spellcaster who has slain the Paladin, only to raise him as a ghoul to use command undead or similar influences to take control over him; laughing maniacally at his domination over the noble soul in his clutches, and all that.
But my question is, if the Paladin wasn't affected by ghoul fever, and is still sentient, exactly why would he become evil? The state of being undead, as agreed by you, is not one of innate evil. Otherwise you would not have good undead like certain well loved Varisian women...
Please don't get me wrong. I actually enjoy using undead as bad guys. They make such excellent bad guys. The vast majority of them in my games are bad guys. But frankly, there is no believability in a world where sentient creatures with free will are always the same alignment. There must be some good undead.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Heck, Golarion is seriously like somebody duct-taped everything from the Forgotten Realms to Call of Cthulu together in some sort of sphere, rolled it around the office a few times, and said "Hey guys, we've got it".
With these words, I now associate Golarion with Katamari Damacy. Maybe forever. :D
|
Creative Director
|
The biggest problem I have with this is that it appears to be just being made up off the top of your head, with no real reasoning behind it; unless you specifically mean being turned into a ghoul via ghoul fever, which specifically removes their abilities and causes them to act as described in the ghoul entry. However, it is possible to become a ghoul without ever contracting ghoul fever. A disease immune Paladin, upon being killed, can be the subject of a create undead spell to turn it into a ghoul without contracting ghoul fever and the drawbacks it has.
I absolutely DO mean specifically being turned into a ghoul with ghoul fever, since that's the way the VAST majority of ghouls come about.
A paladin turned into a thing like a ghoul via other effects still functions the same way I laid out—the method of transformation is irrelevant: as long as said transformation was against the paladin's will, he gains back his paladin powers upon being restored to life, but while he's undead he's evil. Because that's what being turned into an undead does... especially in cases where the effects are caused by a spell with the Evil descriptor. In fact, that's the reason WHY the undead creation spells have the Evil descriptor—because they not only make evil creatures, but can corrupt the bodies of non-evil people into evil creatures, which not only shames and abuses the dead but shames and horrifies the living who knew the person in life.
There is no way you can spontaneously arise as a ghoul and not turn evil as a result, unlike the case with ghosts. If there WERE such a case, and we WANTED such a case, it'd likely be introduced as a story element in an adventure or novel.
Please don't get me wrong. I actually enjoy using undead as bad guys. They make such excellent bad guys. The vast majority of them in my games are bad guys. But frankly, there is no believability in a world where sentient creatures with free will are always the same alignment. There must be some good undead.
You're assuming that undead HAVE free will, first of all. They're supernatural creatures—they don't have to be human. In fact, the fact that they're transformed FROM humans into something always evil is their strength. Are there good non-ghost undead? There COULD be, but if there are, they're very rare. And note that doesn't meant there ARE good undead at all any more than it means there AREN'T any good undead at all. Until I see a reason to do it and have an author capable of handling it it's going to remain out of print for Golarion.
What we have here, essentially, is nothing more than a fundamental difference of opinion in story themes, frankly. And I don't get the feeling we're going to change each other's opinions, nor do I really WANT that, in fact.
|
|
Mikaze,
Something I'm still homebrewing that might work for you:Animate Juju
Prerequisites: Spell Focus (Necromancy), Knowledge (Religion): 3, one of Command Undead, Turn Undead, Undead Bloodline, Sanguine bloodline
Benefit: Undead you animate are not inherently evil. Mindless undead are neutral and intelligent undead are your alignment. Spells creating undead lose the [Evil] descriptor for you.After all, why should just juju Oracles get all the fun?
I think the main change as Talon and Mikaze are correct that it's too easy would be to increase the ranks in Knowledge (Religion) sharply, say to 7. Maybe add in Thanatopic Spell from Ultimate Magic to symbolise the increased study of undead, but I think that would make it too difficult, given it's already a fairly niche feat that doesn't directly affect the power curve.
@Mikaze: cool. I'd be interested in hearing any more ideas (or if someone wanted to list undead we haven't covered/thought about yet, I'd be willing to think on it a bit)
@Paul Watson:
I'd say having knowledge (religion) 7 ranks makes a lot of sense, considering that animate dead (the first spell I know of that can create any sort of undead) is a fourth level spell, meaning most people have to be at least 7th level to get it. However, two feats and a good chunk of skills are really nice to prohibit many choices in this way, so I don't think that another one would be necessary. I might suggest adding that under the "Special" line, something like,...
Animate JujuPrerequisites: Knowledge (religion) 7 ranks; Spell Focus (Necromancy) and one of Command Undead, Sanguine Bloodline, Turn Undead, or Undead Bloodline
Benefits: Undead you animate are not inherently evil. Mindless undead are neutral and intelligent undead are your alignment. Spells creating undead lose the [Evil] descriptor for you.
Special: In some campaign settings non-evil undead are even more rare. In such campaigns run in such settings, as an optional additional prerequisite, the feat Thanatopic Spell can be added to the list of prerequisites.
One possibility under "special" is to think about whether or not these undead are powered by negative energy. I don't see why not, except for the fact that a non-evil undead creator would always be behind his evil rival by sheer virtue of the fact that the evil rival could make great use of the desecrate (or unhallow) spell to do significantly more. Alternatively, if you created a special feat that actually allowed you to cast a spell that functioned like desecrate (or unhallow) for purposes of undead only (not actually dedicating it to evil gods or anything), that might be something interesting or useful (especially if you have this feat as a prerequisite and more knowledge (religion) ranks). Otherwise, you might want to do something with consecrate or hallow. Or not! I don't know how wide-spread you want this thing (though plunking down three-to-five feats into a single ability isn't going to win a ton of converts, so it's not really broken, I'd say).
As a quick write-up/example of what I mean,...
Juju Shadow Wells
Prerequisites: Knowledge (religion) 9 ranks; Animate Juju, Spell Focus (Necromancy), and one of Command Undead, Sanguine Bloodline, Turn Undead, or Undead Bloodline
Benefits: You may add the spells Juju Shadow Well and Deeper Juju Shadow Well to your class spell list. These spells function identically to Desecrate and Unhallow spells (respectively), except these spells lack the [Evil] descriptor, the alter (if any) can be made to any deity of your choice or Wendo spirits, and the benefits only apply to undead created with the Animate Juju feat.
Special: In some campaign settings non-evil undead are even more rare. In such campaigns run in such settings, as an optional additional prerequisite, the feat Thanatopic Spell can be added to the list of prerequisites.
For the spells...
Juju Shadow Well
School Evocation; Level bard 3, cleric/oracle 2, inquisitor 2, sorcerer/wizard 3, witch 3
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard sction
Component V, S, M (a vial of unholy water and 25 gp worth (5 pounds) of silver dust, all of which must be sprinkled around the area), DF (if a divine caster)
EFFECT
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Area 20-ft.-radius emanation
Duration 2 hours/level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance yes
DESCRIPTION
This spell imbues an area with negative energy. The DC to resist negative channeled energy within this area gains a +3 profane bonus. Every undead creature created with Animate Juju or other Juju magic entering the area gains a +1 sacred bonus on all attack rolls, damage rolls, and saving throws. An undead creature created within or summoned into such an area via Animate Juju or other Juju magic gains +1 hit points per HD.If the area of the Juju Shadow Well contains an altar, shrine, or other permanent fixture dedicated to your deity, aligned higher power, or Wendo spirits; the modifiers given above are doubled (+6 profane bonus to negative channeled energy DCs, +2 profane bonus and +2 hit points per HD for undead created in the area).
Furthermore, anyone who casts animate dead while using the Animate Juju feat within this area may create as many as double the normal amount of undead (that is, 4 HD per caster level rather than 2 HD per caster level).
If the area contains an altar, shrine, or other permanent fixture of a deity, pantheon, or higher power other than your patron, the Juju Shadow Well spell instead curses the area, cutting off its connection with the associated deity or power. This secondary function, if used, does not also grant the bonuses and penalties relating to undead, as given above.
Juju Shadow Well counters and dispels consecrate or desecrate.
... and...
Deeper Juju Shadow Well
School Evocation; Level bard 6, cleric/oracle 5, inquisitor 5, sorcerer/wizard 6, witch 6
CASTING
Casting Time 24 hours
Component V, S, M (herbs, oils, and incense worth at least 1,000 gp, plus 1,000 gp per level of the spell to be tied to the shadow well area)
EFFECT
Range touch
Area 40-ft.-radius emanation emanating from the touched point
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw see text; Spell Resistance see text
DESCRIPTION
Deeper Juju Shadow Well makes a particular site, building, or structure a site of great Juju power. This has three major effects.First, the site or structure behaves as if under the effects of a Juju Shadow Well. Similar bonuses or penalties overlap between the two effects, they do not stack.
Second, the DC to resist negative channeled energy within the spell's area of effect gains a +4 sacred bonus and the DC to resist positive energy is reduced by 4. Spell Resistance does not apply to this effect. This provision does not apply to the druid version of the spell.
Finally, you may choose to fix a single spell effect to the site of the Juju Shadow Well. The spell effect lasts for 1 year and functions throughout the entire site, regardless of its normal duration and area or effect. You may designate whether the effect applies to all creatures, creatures that share your faith or alignment, or creatures that adhere to another faith or alignment. At the end of the year, the chosen effect lapses, but it can be renewed or replaced simply by casting Deeper Juju Shadow Well again.
Spell effects that may be tied to the site of a Juju shadow well include aid, bane, bless, cause fear, darkness, daylight, death ward, deeper darkness, detect magic, detect chaos, detect evil, detect good, detect law, dimensional anchor, discern lies, dispel magic, endure elements, freedom of movement, invisibility purge, protection from energy, remove fear, resist energy, silence, tongues, and zone of truth.
Saving throws and Spell Resistance might apply to these spells' effects. (See the individual spell descriptions for details.)
An area can receive only one Deeper Juju Shadow Well spell (and its associated spell effect) at a time.
Deeper Juju Shadow Well counters but does not dispel hallow and unhallow.
Anyway, that's just something that I've come up with off the cuff, I don't know if it's any good or not. I added +2 to the knowledge (religion) ranks because even though Desecrate is a lower-level spell (2nd), Unhallow is a fifth level spell, so that's two points more to the maximum skill ranks. Feel free to drop it. It might not work for you (or might need more tweaking or spell-checking).
EDIT: fixed the "Animate Juju" quote box to look better
Eeeeeeegh. I need to edit the latter one, but I don't have time right now. OH WELL.
After thinking about it, it might be better to just remove Deeper Juju Shadow Well from existence (and ignore the box up there), and allow Juju Shadow Well to be made permanent by a permanency spell. It works better that way, I think, though I'm not positive.
|
My biggest beef with the whole evil undead thing is it directly contradicts the other 80% of the game. I mean, you take a neutral object (a corpse), stuff some neutral energy into it (negative energy), and magically control it (also neutral given other examples of things like golems, unseen servants, etc), and yet somehow this thing which has A) no soul, B) no mind, C) no free will, is somehow of Evil alignment. W. T. F.
For me what always made them evil was the spell itself. The spell animate dead may use negative energy (which I am also in the camp of not being inherently evil) but it also carries the evil descriptor which means that one is channeling the corrupting primal power of primordial evil itself when casting the spell and that causes the current results we get when casting things like animate dead or create undead, you are channeling the raw stuff of places like hell or the abyss and that is what corrupts the body into a ravenous ghoul or a sadistic Morhg. I would almost say it could be considered an inherit flaw in the design of the spell, one that arcanists either haven't found or way around or haven't really seen as a big cost when they get what they want (if the spell has been like this for so long you probably aren't getting people wanting to animate the living as a corpse as a good idea much because of what it's done before, not to say that someone couldn't try...). After saying that I now have some lovely ideas for the origins of the spell, maybe one of the greatest temptations of some devil, demon, or daemon for mortal kind.
That being said I don't really see a white necromancer really wanting to raise the dead back to life that often even with non-evil magic. For me it comes down to the fact that you have just made that person immortal, unable to return to his/her afterlife and the people that might be waiting for them on the other side and the rewards (in the case of good souls) that they have earned from their good lives. I see the White Necro trying more to help the undead that already try to find their way to their final reward in the afterlife. The pic for the White Necro in Kobold 19 is a great example of this since it is implied that she is helping that child find his peace on this side so he can be with his loved ones on the otherside and not be stuck lingering here.
Hell, even the mummy stat block sounds completely backasswards when you read how mummies are typically made. I mean, it goes into great detail about how they are carefully and sacredly embalming the body, filling it with incense and dried flowers, anointing them in sacred oils, wrapping them with holy blessed linens, etc, etc, etc. Then it basically says they cast create undead and BAM, bad guy. Again, "W. T. F."?
Just wanted to address this one real quick. Though I will say that I am with you in this camp that mummies are one of the few undead that, like ghosts shouldn't be evil in the majority your argument here doesn't really hold as much weight with me. I would think that many cultures could very carefully and tenderly care for the bodies of their dead. Take Asmodeus for example, I'd bet dollars to donuts that their high priests, popes, and high nobility (Queen Abrognail I for example) were probably buried with all the pomp & circumstance of any pharaoh or high priest of osirion and have their bodies kept in incredible condition.
|
|
That being said I don't really see a white necromancer really wanting to raise the dead back to life that often even with non-evil magic. For me it comes down to the fact that you have just made that person immortal, unable to return to his/her afterlife and the people that might be waiting for them on the other side and the rewards (in the case of good souls) that they have earned from their good lives.
IIRC, the white necro write-up actually notes that most undead raised by their methods only intend to be so for a limited time. I'd take that as them being able to break their undead binds when they feel the time is right, since they were brought back by their own free will.
I see the White Necro trying more to help the undead that already try to find their way to their final reward in the afterlife. The pic for the White Necro in Kobold 19 is a great example of this since it is implied that she is helping that child find his peace on this side so he can be with his loved ones on the otherside and not be stuck lingering here.
I saw them as both(absolutely saw that art the same way, love that picture), with white necros putting pre-existing undead to rest and helping unmanifested spirits that still have unfinished business take form and put their affairs in order. Along with some "calling upon the strength and wisdom of the honored dead" thrown in.
|
|
Thinking about WN/JO-raised ghoul equivalents. Wondering if foregoing alignment-typed variants in favor of hunger-themed variants might be best for them. That is, hunger based on why they came back or were created. Things like compulsive hunger for diseased flesh(helps prevent plauge), flesh of fallen evil beings, stamina, traumatic memories, pleasant memories, the hands of thieves, undeath-tainted flesh, things like that.
Something that would require such a being to demonstrate some restraint, since those compulsions would be incredibly inappropriate from some to all of the time, depending on what it is.
What I'm really hungry for are traditions by culture for WN/JO's. Onsirion's practically writes itself, with its loyal guards and whatnot watching over the necropoli that house the godkings they served in life. They might actually be a necessity, to stand between the sacred remains of their dead and the ghoul city underneath Osirion.
Maybe Sarkoris shamans near the Worldwound protect small untainted tribes by bolstering their ranks with those that have gone before, infusing them with the spirits of their ancestors and what few untainted nature spirits remain that still watch over them, making these undead sentinels immune to the demonic taint that lays over the area. Heck, those undead, being possessed by the Sarkoris equivalent of wendo spirits, might actually act like weak mobile wardstones, protecting the living from the area's chaos taint.
|
Have you considered creating a spell, akin to Awaken, that would allow a ravenous undead to regain some semblance of memory of their old life? It'd be called 'Reform Undeath' or something.
You could then have a White Necromancer's Sanctuary that holds a monolith-sized artifact that casts the spell on any undead trapped in the artifact radius for 24 hrs or more.
It's your Golarion. You could determine that five years ago the Silver Crusade developed this new spell and new magical item, and ever since, there's been a 'reformation' of a large number of captured undead. Although prejudice still exists, people are beginning to see slain tower lookouts return to duty as skeletons, or murdered rangers leap through the trees as ghouls.
This way, you can play a normal necromancer, but have your character ensure that their ravenous undead are not zombie 1 or zombie 2, but instead are Shane and Otis.
|
|
I would say that you might just want to make something that lacks the compulsion theme all together. Going off what I said before if the reason that most undead are evil because of the spells used to make them corrupting the bodies as they are created, if someone is to find a way to create undead without using evil spells you would theoretically end up with wholly new undead unseen thus far on Golarion. I would say that if you are making one for a ghoul make him look happy and fat like a plump man sated after a big meal. I would drop the disease component as being a good undead they wouldn't want to spread the disease to other as it goes against the idea of wanting to reach the afterlife. finally i would keep the paralysis but would describe it as the victim is lost in a euphoria like one unable to move after a really big meal.
What are people looking for in a white necromancer?
Have you considered creating a spell, akin to Awaken, that would allow a ravenous undead to regain some semblance of memory of their old life? It'd be called 'Reform Undeath' or something.
In 3.5, there was a similar spell already; though it didn't exactly give the former personality back (at all), as-written, it does have some former connection to its life - it maintains all its previous proficiencies with weapons and armor (just don't use it on a human wizard - a maximum intelligence of 10, and the worst selection of proficiencies possible, aside from commoner).
You could then have a White Necromancer's Sanctuary that holds a monolith-sized artifact that casts the spell on any undead trapped in the artifact radius for 24 hrs or more.
This is an interesting idea. It also reminds me of the epic project the quori were working on in Eberron (though, of course, for different purposes).
It's your Golarion. You could determine that five years ago the Silver Crusade developed this new spell and new magical item, and ever since, there's been a 'reformation' of a large number of captured undead. Although prejudice still exists, people are beginning to see slain tower lookouts return to duty as skeletons, or murdered rangers leap through the trees as ghouls.
Another interesting idea!
This way, you can play a normal necromancer, but have your character ensure that their ravenous undead are not zombie 1 or zombie 2, but instead are Shane and Otis.
Heh... now that's pretty creepy!
What are people looking for in a white necromancer?
* EEEEEEEEEEDIT: Er, I mean, "of course" instead. While the link I left above is actually strikingly thematically appropriate for David Bowie, all-things considered, it is not the Libris Mortis prestige class I was intending there. Whoops.
EDIT 2: It appears the actual class' progression is kind of difficult to find online. Also some clean up.
EDIT 3: The Threadening. Er, I mean, Even more clean up and confessions of a part time derper. Apparently they're not hard to find at all.
And, hey, while I'm here, more Dirgesinger Pictures, why not?
Junk
Way to completely destroy your own joke, man. Sheesh. Next your going to be commenting on your own post, as if that wasn't old.
Way to completely destroy your own joke, man. Sheesh. Next your going to be commenting on your own post, as if that wasn't old.
Quiet, you.
EDIT: Aaaaaaaaanyway:
I would say that you might just want to make something that lacks the compulsion theme all together. Going off what I said before if the reason that most undead are evil because of the spells used to make them corrupting the bodies as they are created, if someone is to find a way to create undead without using evil spells you would theoretically end up with wholly new undead unseen thus far on Golarion. I would say that if you are making one for a ghoul make him look happy and fat like a plump man sated after a big meal. I would drop the disease component as being a good undead they wouldn't want to spread the disease to other as it goes against the idea of wanting to reach the afterlife. finally i would keep the paralysis but would describe it as the victim is lost in a euphoria like one unable to move after a really big meal.
This is an interesting idea, but, while I completely see what you're going for (and like some of it), I'm not sure I entirely agree. Disease isn't necessarily an inherently evil thing, after all, (though it might be, and might also be the result of evil, depending on what cosmological mythos you're talking about).
I think that's a great idea for one facet of the ghoulishness in which disease is, more or less, evil. I think, however, the introduction to "Plagues" by way of the Book of Exalted Deeds (a book which... regrettably wasn't that great, truth be told, nifty little bits notwithstanding) shows that there can be "good" or "sanctified" versions of "disease" (though it also tended to overplay that aspect a bit).
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Undead as evil and malign has been part of the concept that's just about as old as dirt. And it's unique to midieval Europe it's practically universal across the planet.
Well, sure, if you exclude Africa, Ancient Egypt, Ancient Rome, Early Christianity, Catholicism, China, Korea, India, Philippines, Vietnam, Britain, Ireland, Native Americans, Mongolia, Tibet, etc. then, yeah, pretty much everybody hates the spirits of their ancestors and regards them as mindless and evil, and not as guides or comforting presences or forces to respect and honor and propitiate, to ask for guidance, or to invoke for their blessings on a marriage or birth, or even give gifts to, in the form of funerary riches or 'spirit money' or respectful remembrance.
I think there's quite the difference between Spirits and the Undead. It's just unfortunate that they're one and the same in D&D/PF.
Also, question about what people want in a White Necro still stands :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So much for this thread ever getting back on track. Considering just starting a new thread and stating outright "This isn't about debating whether or not you can have non-evil undead. This is about coming up with flavor for the white necromancer and juju oracle that fit them into Golarion for those players that want non-evil undead in their games".
If you don't want non-evil undead, you've got the official books and Paizo agrees with you. So can't the rest of us just have one thread that isn't derailed by the same old debates and "you're doing it wrong" accusations?
Have you considered creating a spell, akin to Awaken, that would allow a ravenous undead to regain some semblance of memory of their old life? It'd be called 'Reform Undeath' or something.
That actually fits quite nicely with the White Necromancer's schtick. Keeping that in mind. :)
What are people looking for in a white necromancer?
A class that's about working with the dead rather than enslaving them.
A class that plays up the Dark Is Not Evil trope.
A class that has high creepiness potential while remaining benevolent.
A class that's bound by their own code of rules in how they deal with the dead, guided by respect and/or empathy.
A class that's about helping the dead and being helped by the dead in turn. Sometimes it's all about helping the dead move on. Sometimes it's about a give-and-take, an arrangement between equals.
A class that enables a wider variety of stories to happen in our games than an absolutist "undead are always evil" stance allows.
Basically what I want out of a white necromancer, Kobold Quarterly delivered. Now I'm just trying to fit them into Golarion.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What are people looking for in a white necromancer?
I'm OK with not working with undead; I'm fine with defining them (or their creation) as all evil. But necromancy isn't just about undead. It's not really about healing, either (though I would be happy if healing spells moved back to the necromancy category rather than making conjuration even more of a grab-bag!), and arcane necromancy isn't about being a refluffed cleric; it's not about healing except perhaps incidentally. (I put healing in the "too complex for arcane magic, it's a gift of divinity" sort of thing -- but, say, a spell that boosted someone's natural healing rate would be a good arcane necromancy spell.)
A necromancer is someone who works with blood, and bone, and the magic of blood, and the life force and soul directly. It's a deeper level than enchantment, which is just a brief brushing of the mind; it works with the body, without being transmutation; it exists at the core of the self at the point where soul and body intersect, below the level of conscious thought.
There should be a whole slew of blood-related and life-related magics that are part of necromancy. (Half of them would belong in the Book of Erotic Fantasy, though...) Creating arcane connections via body and blood, curses and the lifting of curses (which are breaks between soul and body), etc., etc.
|
|
What are people looking for in a white necromancer?
Cleric and Arcane builds, preferablly more Cleric (and Oracle?). Arcane already have some decent options in the core material, while divine are extremely limited to a goddess of death and fate that actually doesn't allow this sort of thing after all.
Something along the lines of a priest that raises fallen allies to continue the fight on (if temporarily) rather than cause more death. Someone who might channel darker energies for good, or invest the dead with elemental or even angelic spirits, or rather than tie a corpse to the Negative Energy Plane, perhaps prevent it's spirit from reaching an afterlife for a time.
Perhaps an alternate version of Raise Dead rather than Animate/Create Undead.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thinking about that Eternal Charge of the First Mendevian Crusade idea a bit more. Wonder just how long a small unit of undead soldiers with white necromancer "medics" could realistically last in the Worldwound.
Imagining them as these weary old soldiers that have been patched together time and time again, but they keep pushing onward, taking back what holdings they can(not many) for a time(not long), and rescuing what innocents remain in the area(fewer and fewer as the years go by). If the white necros aren't undead themselves, they could very well be held up by their children or grandchildren, who may very well be tieflings after being born on tainted lands. These children likely would have been raised as much by these undead soldiers and paladins as their actual parents. Could make for some interesting NPC allies or even PC concepts. Soldiers of the Charge may not be welcome back in Mendev*, but that doesn't stop them from escorting refugees to safe(r) lands before turning right back around and marching back into the land that's killed them once already.
Could make for a good bail-out moment for PCs adventuring in the Worldwound. These guys charge in and rescue them, but they can't hold up against whatever was after the PCs forever. They'll willingly lay down their "lives" to protect the PCs and allow them to escape, but they may just charge them with a task they must complete so that they can finally rest easy, knowing their mission was done.
*Which could be a great irony. The guys from the First Crusade are much more likely to be true idealists, particularly compared to the dirtier lot you get coming into Mendev these days, what with their Burners and persecution of the native populace.