I am playing the mummy's Mask campaign it is a egyptian setting
I am playing a Half Gnoll Cleric of Sarenrae
someone in my game is expressing interest in wanting to play someone who uses necromancy spells as we know not all necromancers are actually bad
so my question is this how would I a follower of Sarenrae act or should act towards a necromancer initially untill they have proven themselves to be good
what is Sarenrae's views against necromancers & raising the dead there views & beliefs etc ?
I am wanting to know so if this does happen I know accordingly how I should act
The necromancy school of magic, probably not a problem depending on how someone uses the spells.
Raising undead, pretty much verboten. Sarenrae's good, not evil. Creating evil stuff is bad. Burn those undead abominations with your holy light!
Now, Sarenrae's also into redemption, so if you want to play your character as putting up with the other while working to sway him/her/it from their evil ways, that would work just fine.
Most importantly, talk OOC with your fellow player about it!
Sarenrae is anti-undead. She isn't anti-necromancer so long as said necromancer doesn't create undead.
I believe her teachings are something along the lines of
"BURN THE HERETICS!"
or "REDEEM THE HERETICS!"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the most important question is "How does your Half-Gnoll Cleric act around a person that uses <the school of> necromancy?"
There should be a line drawn. Creating and using Undead is on one side, and your character's faith has established that that side of the line is "irredeemable". But, with that a one side of the line, you as the player and the character have some leeway to decide where exactly that line fits in relation to other things. Using dark powers, possibly for good reasons, (or not) can fit a little more lateral or medial on that scale, and possibly on either side of that line.
The idea of the Good Necromancer is one of those concepts that Paizo just hasn't managed to do, especially on the divine side, which is sad, as it's a strong concept, but it is what it is.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wish cure spells were necromancy if only to reinforce that necromancy isn't all about making living things dead and dead things undead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish cure spells were necromancy if only to reinforce that necromancy isn't all about making living things dead and dead things undead.
I've thought the same thing in many different fantasy game settings before. It's a lot more interesting when life magic and death magic are the same thing and it's just a matter of how it's applied.
|
|
I wish cure spells were necromancy if only to reinforce that necromancy isn't all about making living things dead and dead things undead.
As I recall, the reason this was changed is because they wanted to spread out more spells along the schools, and from the (3.0) Core Book, Conjuration was lacking outside of pretty much straight Summoning spells. That also made Feats like Spell Focus Conjuration, (needed for Augment Summoning) nearly useless.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish cure spells were necromancy if only to reinforce that necromancy isn't all about making living things dead and dead things undead.As I recall, the reason this was changed is because they wanted to spread out more spells along the schools, and from the (3.0) Core Book, Conjuration was lacking outside of pretty much straight Summoning spells. That also made Feats like Spell Focus Conjuration, (needed for Augment Summoning) nearly useless.
That's pretty much spot on. Healing WAS necromancy in 1st and 2nd edition.
...because spell focus conjuration and augment summoning are so useless^^
While Sarenrae might be anti-undead and some other good deities too, there is one thing to consider: just how much pressure do you want to put on your fellow player? Even if there is an ingame reason, think about how much you want to restrict his play choices. This might end up in personal frustration, i can tell from personal experience.
You can always ingame moan about the undead and the wrong way etc, what can even be cool roleplay. But actively destrying them could be a bit over the top.
The problem is that undead are necesarily evil.
Couldn´t there be some skeletons and ghosts etc based on called ancestors or similar stuff?
|
|
...because spell focus conjuration and augment summoning are so useless^^
While Sarenrae might be anti-undead and some other good deities too, there is one thing to consider: just how much pressure do you want to put on your fellow player? Even if there is an ingame reason, think about how much you want to restrict his play choices. This might end up in personal frustration, i can tell from personal experience.
The flip side of that is, though, that the Cleric has a mechanical reason to have a (possible) issue with this, though. If a Cleric strays too far from their patron's ideals, they loose their power, and that is almost entirely in the DM's hands, not the player's. And different DM's have different views on how that works.
Another side to that is that the "Necromancer" is doing the exact same thing to the Cleric player.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
or "REDEEM THE HERETICS!"This is the correct answer. ;-)
*tosses bag of heretics onto counter*
"How much can I redeem these for?"
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
or "REDEEM THE HERETICS!"This is the correct answer. ;-)*tosses bag of heretics onto counter*
"How much can I redeem these for?"
"I'm gonna have to call in my necromancer guy, but I don't think I can give you more than 20 gp for 'em. Not much demand for that year's heretic model. Come back with a half-fiend, and we'll talk."
"I'm gonna have to call in my necromancer guy, but I don't think I can give you more than 20 gp for 'em. Not much demand for that year's heretic model. Come back with a half-fiend, and we'll talk."or "REDEEM THE HERETICS!"This is the correct answer. ;-)*tosses bag of heretics onto counter*
"How much can I redeem these for?"
"20 gp? Man, I gotta find a better source of cash. Maybe stripping copper wiring out of androids..."
...because spell focus conjuration and augment summoning are so useless^^
While Sarenrae might be anti-undead and some other good deities too, there is one thing to consider: just how much pressure do you want to put on your fellow player? Even if there is an ingame reason, think about how much you want to restrict his play choices. This might end up in personal frustration, i can tell from personal experience.
You can always ingame moan about the undead and the wrong way etc, what can even be cool roleplay. But actively destrying them could be a bit over the top.
The problem is that undead are necesarily evil.
Couldn´t there be some skeletons and ghosts etc based on called ancestors or similar stuff?
Well Eberron had a form of undead like that(though type wise they were not undead but close) used by the elves who were big into ancestor worship. So there is precedent in 3.5 for it...you could concert it.
|
Well Eberron had a form of undead like that(though type wise they were not undead but close) used by the elves who were big into ancestor worship. So there is precedent in 3.5 for it...you could concert it.The problem is that undead are necesarily evil.
Couldn´t there be some skeletons and ghosts etc based on called ancestors or similar stuff?
IIRC, Dwarves of Golarion has a spell that summons up ancestral spirits that aren't evil and gross, but helpful and stuff.
Using incorporeal outsider-y petitioners, instead of ghosts, might be one way to go. It's still calling up souls of the dead, but those souls have become outsiders, so no pesky undead type or always evil problems.
Some might argue that this would make the spells to summon these spirits of the dead Conjuration, and not Necromancy, at which point point out that summoning up creatures from the plane of shadow is *Illusion* magic, and laugh at them for trying to apply consistency to magic. That way lies madness. And tears. And then more madness.
Summoning up petitioners of Sarenrae, and then some confused undead-hunting Pharasmin trying to smite them for being dead souls unnaturally trespassing on the mortal plane, would be hilarious.
|
|
Well Eberron had a form of undead like that(though type wise they were not undead but close) used by the elves who were big into ancestor worship. So there is precedent in 3.5 for it...you could concert it.
Actually, the Deathless Type predated Eberron. They are essentially Undead that are powered by Positive Energy rather then Negative Energy, and a few minor tweeks, mostly in how they reacted to Cleric's Turn/Rebuke Undead and the like. But even before that, the 3.0 setting had something very similar in the Ghostwalk campaign setting, but it was never really updated (not really) to the 3.5 rules, or even really touched afterwards.
Well Eberron had a form of undead like that(though type wise they were not undead but close) used by the elves who were big into ancestor worship. So there is precedent in 3.5 for it...you could concert it.Actually, the Deathless Type predated Eberron. They are essentially Undead that are powered by Positive Energy rather then Negative Energy, and a few minor tweeks, mostly in how they reacted to Cleric's Turn/Rebuke Undead and the like. But even before that, the 3.0 setting had something very similar in the Ghostwalk campaign setting, but it was never really updated (not really) to the 3.5 rules, or even really touched afterwards.
True...I probably remembered it from Eberron because it was slightly different and more rooted into the background of that campaign. (they were vulnerable to a special metal only find in Eberron).
The Forgotten Realms also had a good aligned elven lich that pretty much stayed alive to do something. (Baerlorn I think they were called)
And once again Jacobs is proved right. So many of these issues go away if Paladins are banned from the table.
100% missed that statement. Is that irony?
Can say a lot of rogues and other cool adventurers had a lot of problems with paladins and similar minded people.
Also, while many say "ohhh the disruptive necromancer, thief, etc" i can say saw more than enough very disruptive paladin players. Actually more.
Probably best to strike a balance there.
Difference is though, for a necromancing magic wielder, you´re then making a lot of her spells and abilities obsolete, maybe even feats.
The paladin/Cleric believe thing is totaly in GM hands and just don´t be a dick there.
In my eyes, regardless what the fluff says, it should be possible to have both in a group and cooperate and have fun.