|
Now I have had a look at the PFS guideline, and it seems that people can create undead (Animate dead spells) and not become 'evil'.
I also see Undead Lord is out.
I was wondering then, is the general gist that players aren't supposed to be running any versions of Necromancers?
I got hit up with a character concept of an Undead creator/Summoner, and took a raincheck while I investigated.
Any idea if the Augment Summoning Feat covers Animate Dead - does animation count as summons? and there doesn't appear to be undead on the core Summon Monster list anyhow.
What's to stop a player carting around the dead body of some big nasty and just re-animating it at the start of any given session? There's no 'dead body' on the CRB equipment list.
/facepalm.
|
|
There's a bit of table variation on this topic. I have heard of people running undead using the one combat animal rule, but also see where it could be seen as using a consumable as you are spending spell slots and material components. I don't think many people would give you a hard time either way you choose to run it.
A couple of things though. All spells including animate dead end after the scenario so no bringing undead between scenarios. You also can't keep bodies between scenarios to animate as they are not listed on a chronicle or in any book that I know of. You should also caution anyone playing a necromancer to play a different character if there is a paladin at the table or a cleric of pharasma.
Augment summoning only works on summon spells, not animate dead. The italicized summon in the feat description means it is referring to a spell.
|
|
Thanks Robert.
The Summoning thing got me too, as I read that you are only supposed to have one pet/sidekick/etc, yet some of the Summons warp in several creatures.
And yeah, I couldn't find dead body (or Taxidermised animals) on the equipment list either, but then I suppose it is not exhaustive.
And TY Portella/Robert , that's my reading too regarding Summons.
|
Shifty,
One thing that is very important to do, as Mr Mathews brings up, is to talk to the other players at the table, and ask if there will be a problem if your character animates the dead, especially if they are playing a character ( cleric of pharasma, Sarenrae, Paladin Etc) that might very well be deeply offended by the animation of the dead, vehemently opposed to such necromantic magic. Try to come to a compromise with the players that you both feel you can live with.
For example a compromise between players might be: the controlling of existing undead would be ok but not the animation of the dead.
but the important thing is to talk to the other players. It will save headaches down the road.
I hope this helps,
Myles Crocker
|
It's dependant on table variation as Robert A Matthews already said.
The larger the table, the smaller the chance you will get to use such ability. It's mainly because certain character's might vote against sucha act, however, I did tend to make compromise or two with paladins/clerics that after the undead helped out with a certain task, they can personally smite him down. This made several character less grumpy and more acceptable of it.
I also recommend Command Undead feat if you plan to use a cleric for your objective.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover
|
Mechanically, in PFS that worse than other stuff having a pet, since it comes late, you need to create it every time and buffing feats don´t apply. So you always waste a spell for it and it takes time, which in some scenarios can be difficult.
Paladins or others objecting fall into the PvP and "Don´t be a jerk" rule for me and i daresay it´s right and legal to rely on that in this case.
Other players or GM´s forcing their beliefs of how to play on the group is not a PFS thing. If it´s legal to play it´s legal to play.
There is enough stuff on egocentric paladin players here on the forum to support that i think.
And there is still the vice versa. More than enough legal stuff to play allows to oppose named faiths and classes, ending in PvP, discussions and general jerkery. Which brings up the don´t be a jerk rule again.
Table variation has no grasp here in my eyes, feel free to report people objecting.
Of course i would apply the one pet only rule to this.
|
People objecting isn't pvp, thats inter party conflict. I summon a ton of undead, it's what I do, because there isnt quite anything like having grandma dig herself up to lend aid.
Also, this isn't a pet, it's a 25 gold per hd spell, and there have been times when I have had 44hd worth of undead out,
with my familiar. I would be very cross if someone told me I couldn't use multiple resources and a few thousand gold pieces for my toys not to work.
|
How many animals can I have at any given time?
During the course of a scenario, you may have one combat animal and as many noncombat animals as you like. Noncombat animals (ponies, horses, pet dogs, and so on) cannot participate in combat at all. If you have so many noncombat animals that their presence is slowing a session down, the GM has the right to ask you to select one noncombat animal and leave the rest behind. A summoner's eidolon is considered an animal companion for the purposes of counting combat and noncombat animals. If you have more than one class-granted animal companion (or eidolon), you must choose which will be considered the combat animal at the start of the scenario. In general, a mount, a familiar or mundane pet, and your class-granted animal(s) are acceptable, but more than that can be disruptive.
There are no specific restrictions on mass summonings in the FAQ... and it's a legal spell effect. This goes for both 'Animate Dead' and 'Summon Monster'. The idea here I believe (as detailed above) is to avoid pets being disruptive to play... which basically boils down to one player soaking up most of the gametime due to the fact that they have more pieces on the field.
Summon Monster clearly allows multiple summonings and it is a legal spell. The same also holds true for Animate Dead. By the same token, if this were to become a problem at the table... the GM should disallow it... based on the spirit of the ruling above.This is of course My Opinion and interpretation of the rules in the FAQ & Guide.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not really sure why everyone has this big hostility toward necromancy. It certainly has it's dangers as does any sort of magic... but when used properly and prudently... it is really quite useful.
As a character you're
1) raising an unholy mockery of life with the living embodiment of evil given physical form.
2) The only thing keeping said unholy mockery of live from trying to eat everyone's brains is you. If you die (an occupational hazard) the party now has 5 more enemies to fight.. usually at a very bad time.
As a player,
You're kind of relying on the no PVP rule to keep Players from fully role playing their character by smiting the undead and or you.
A good undead horde is a lot of dice rolls to run, they take time in combat.
|
|
I'm not really sure why everyone has this big hostility toward necromancy. It certainly has it's dangers as does any sort of magic... but when used properly and prudently... it is really quite useful.As a character you're
1) raising an unholy mockery of life with the living embodiment of evil given physical form.
2) The only thing keeping said unholy mockery of live from trying to eat everyone's brains is you. If you die (an occupational hazard) the party now has 5 more enemies to fight.. usually at a very bad time.
As a player,
You're kind of relying on the no PVP rule to keep Players from fully role playing their character by smiting the undead and or you.
A good undead horde is a lot of dice rolls to run, they take time in combat.
Most smart people don't go starting fights with high level sorcerer's or wizards. They live longer that way.
There is no moral ambiguity here, only what's brought in. No one is at fault, not the person who plays the paladin, or the person who plays a dead raising necromancer.The only moral problems begin when people think that the play style of others isn't fair, and or right. Most should respect everyone's characters and their play style even if it doesn't mesh with their own.
Cooperate, explore, report - feeblemind the paladin.. ^_^
|
|
1) raising an unholy mockery of life with the living embodiment of evil given physical form.
This really seems to be a matter of personal opinion... one man's mockery is another's tribute. Besides.. they're dead... soul is gone on to other business... it's really just the mundane earthy stuff that's involved here.
2) The only thing keeping said unholy mockery of live from trying to eat everyone's brains is you. If you die (an occupational hazard) the party now has 5 more enemies to fight.. usually at a very bad time.
This goes toward the whole 'proper and prudent use' thing.
Game wise... it is probably 'better' to raise a single more powerful undead creature than a horde of wimpy ones... unless you need some serious crowd control... but again this is more like any other spell... use it the way it works best.
1) raising an unholy mockery of life with the living embodiment of evil given physical form.This really seems to be a matter of personal opinion... one man's mockery is another's tribute. Besides.. they're dead... soul is gone on to other business... it's really just the mundane earthy stuff that's involved here.
Isn't PFS set in Golarion where all undead are evil?
|
|
Isn't PFS set in Golarion where all undead are evil?1) raising an unholy mockery of life with the living embodiment of evil given physical form.This really seems to be a matter of personal opinion... one man's mockery is another's tribute. Besides.. they're dead... soul is gone on to other business... it's really just the mundane earthy stuff that's involved here.
Eyup
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
Actually, Prindlemire, what you are doing is severing their soul's last connection to their body (or some variation on that, hence why animate dead prevents raise dead or speak with dead being cast on that person.) So it's not like the soul has gone on to other business.
The rule of thumb I liked is "If it goes away at the end of the encounter, you can have as many as you like as long as you can run them quickly. It's even better if you hand running them around the table so everyone gets to share the fun. If it follows you from adventure to adventure, it is a pet, and you only get one combat pet per game."
As for paladins, one solution is to cast in context. For dead antagonists: "I'm not raising these people for my own convenience, They were evil people, and I am raising them so that they can atone for their acts one last time by aiding us in this good and lawful adventure." (It must be good and lawful, right? The paladin is doing it!) For victims of the antagonists: "I'm giving these poor souls a quiet rest by giving them a chance to right the horrible wrong that was done to them, and when that is done I will lay them back to rest."
|
|
Very rarely is an undead creature not evil. In fact, I can think of only one undead creature that I have ever seen published by Paizo that is not evil. Skeleton and Zombie Template make the animated creatures evil. All the creatures you can make with create undead are evil. How do you make a non-evil undead as a PC? Just because a faction creates undead doesn't mean that it is not evil.
|
|
Nope, Juju Oracles, Various Mwanji npc's, and the entire country of Osiron disagrees with you good wolf
JuJu oracles were banned from PFS and golarion specifically for that reason.
Furthermore, the idea of a "good" lich is not part of our design philosophy—with the exception of some ghosts, pretty much ALL undead in Pathfinder are evil, because that's kind of what it means to become undead—to embrace evil James Jacobs
As far as Golarion and my personal games and my personal preferences go... a good aligned juju oracle can't create undead because (with the exception of certain rare ghosts) all undead are evil. Linky
|
|
Most smart people don't go starting fights with high level sorcerer's or wizards.
Int IS a dump stat for paladins.
There is no moral ambiguity here, only what's brought in. No one is at fault, not the person who plays the paladin, or the person who plays a dead raising necromancer.
Out of character I agree, everyone gets to play their character.
In character I also agree. There is no ambiguity, the spells say [evil] right in the text, you're violating the objective moral laws of the universe.
Cooperate, explore, report - feeblemind the paladin.. ^_^
Thats a buff for most paladins isn't it?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it's actually Paizo itself that has inspired this bigotry against the undead? It seems a somewhat simplistic view on a complex topic.
Sure.. there are many of these creatures.. particularly those who have hungers for flesh and serve no good purposes.. that commit acts that might be construed to be 'evil' by some.. but when the dead are called upon by a goodly master.. or at least a neutral one with good tendencies... and asked to act in righteous causes. How could they then be considered 'evil'?
There are rather famous stories that make use of the dead to win the day for virtuous purposes.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yup, along with the bigotry against demons and devils.
Well, actually, it's Gary Gygax, but everyone since then has continued it.
They seem to have this strange idea that using evil means to accomplish good is not (ultimately) a good act. Something about some road paved with good intentions?
|
|
So it's actually Paizo itself that has inspired this bigotry against the undead? It seems a somewhat simplistic view on a complex topic.
Sure.. there are many of these creatures.. particularly those who have hungers for flesh and serve no good purposes.. that commit acts that might be construed to be 'evil' by some.. but when the dead are called upon by a goodly master.. or at least a neutral one with good tendencies... and asked to act in righteous causes. How could they then be considered 'evil'?
There are rather famous stories that make use of the dead to win the day for virtuous purposes.
The ends don't justify the means, utilitarianism is not good in PFS. Altruism is the standard of what is good in PFS.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey if a players wants to sneak back animate a zombie disguise it as a servant. I think that should be kosher. It is costly to animate dead and they last one scenario. Plus the undead are not very powerful.
In my experience people hear undead and think they NEED to be antagonistic towards it. Even if it is metagaming they have a lisence to be a jerk if someone uses undead.
I would be more worried about a command undead dhampir commanding twice thier HD in intended enemies for the rest of the scenario.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover
|
... Even if done with good intentions, the "problem" is that there are classes and archetypes out there that are strongly opposed to the use of such abilities by nature. Because there's a good chance of partying with such types of PCs, it's not really a great idea to depend on the use of "controversial" abilities to such an extent that you're not effective in the scenario if your party asks you not to animate dead or summon demons.
.....
Yeah exactly. Only all of this suppsedly "good" stuff is in the same amount antagonist to a lot of other stuff, which isn´t necessarily bad or evil. Look at Paladins and poison use/rogues,......
There are already so many discussions about how to avoid playing lawful stupid.If you play in PFS, you want your character to be accepted. Just do the same with others, even if they conjure undead and you´re a Paladin of Pharasma (impossible simplification).
Being disruptive ist still being disruptive even as a Paladin.
You can roleplay your aversion and make ingame comments, but stay civil and don´t do or say things you would not like to hear said or done to you.
|
|
Eh, I've used command undead. It can be cool and can shut down enemies, but usually you don't get enough undead to work with, and you don't get to use it all that often anyway. Sometimes you get a really cool undead but not often.
Dhampir can command twice their level. So once they hit like level 3 they can command any undead they face if it fails thier will save. Which they can make pretty high.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow ok, so all of the above was why I said "Ermm lemme check".
Seems a bit divisive as an issue - will caution away from the idea.
Shifty that´s exactly what should not happen and one reason why we have PFS. A player should be able to play everything legalized by the campaign leadership, independant from individual GMs and other players personal opinion or views.
Yes there are some conflicts in lore with Pharasma and perhaps others.But that can make some fun for roleplaying and if it goes beyond, it is clearly disruptive behaviour.
Imagine a sorcerer with enchantment bonus, picking up the peacemaker feat and calm emotions. What would happen if i cast that on the paladin and barbarian? Would i do that?
In the end it would be the same behaviour, it would keep them from their class abilities, only because i claim i want to solve conflicts peacefully.
Please go on and play what you want as long as it is campaign legal.
The only legal restriction there is the GM letting you have only one undead "companion" per scenario because of the "one pet" rule. You could still summon additional stuff in combat.
|
Out of curiosity, how did you come by this philosophy, cause in the scenarios I have ran, the novels I have read, and the various NPC's I have encountered, this is 100% backwards in my PFS experience.
They're probably neutral and have made peace with (or justified) their actions. In Golarion, and therefore in PFS, Undead are always evil. Creating them is always an evil action. You can justify it to yourself however you want, but in Golarion good and evil are not subjective.
|
|
Maybe you are right about most beings in Golarion being Neutral, afterall the majority of the Iconics are, but on the other issue, I would love to see some RAW about creating undead being an evil action. Yes the zombie detects as evil, but I cannot seem to find anything about the act of creating one constituting an evil action.Here you go:
Animate Dead, Lesser
School necromancy [evil];
...
Animate Dead
School necromancy [evil];
...
Create Undead
School necromancy [evil];
...
Create Greater Undead
School necromancy [evil];
...
Evil: Spells that draw upon evil powers or conjure creatures from evil-aligned planes or with the evil subtype should have the evil descriptor.
[Descriptor]
...Most of these descriptors have no game effect by themselves, but they govern how the spell interacts with other spells, with special abilities, with unusual creatures, with alignment, and so on.
