We're getting Necromancers and Runesmiths on Monday

[Squiggit]

Ravingdork wrote:

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

Hey Paizo! It's great to see that now freed from the terrible, onerous, burden that was Wizard schools, you can now make new caster classes which represent these potential identities as full fledged classes.

Please don't forget to go back and give the Wizard an actual class identity now!

Yet more evidence of Paizo taking away from existing options so that they can tout and sell their new options.

??? The wizard has never done the things that are being talked about here though. You're stretching so hard to try to make everything fit this pet theory of yours.

[Losonti]

Also the rules are...free?

[OrochiFuror]

Blave wrote:

OrochiFuror wrote:

One action to create within 30 feet and takes up a square? That's broken, hello new bonewall/bonecage. Every turn you block off 3 sides of a boss, if you ever get more then you completely surround one enemy every turn and then can double layer thrallwall. If taking away actions is the name of the game, necro wins.

And it scales with your proficiency. At level 19 you can create 4 thralls per action!

Yeah, that has to have touch range. Otherwise it's auto win against any non aoe, flying, burrowing enemy that doesn't have 35+ range.

I hope there's different thrall trypes, since someone mentioned lots of focus feats, being able to call different thralls for different tasks would be nice. Like grapple thrall, trip thrall, physical damage thrall, blocking thrall, ranged damage/elemental damage thrall, etc.
Hope mixing this with reanimator, undead master and Lich works out well.

[Ravingdork]

I expect the necromancer won't have real undead minions, but rather class abilities and magical effects that pretend to be. I predict that, at least initially, the necromancer will be another disaster akin to the Swarmkeeper archetype.

[Loreguard]

A part of me wishes they didn't 'always get hit'. But if they had a low saves and 1 HP, and perhaps when targeting a Thrall you didn't ever apply MAP to hit, it might come close to the same but leave some room for some chances. Also could leave room for Thralls potentially having resistance which might prevent some higher level ones potentially having some immunity from particularly low level minions attacking them with specific types of attacks or certain weak splash weapons.

I wonder if they can 'inhabit' a Thrall's body to be more up front and personal about attacking, but end up sharing damage like a summoner, with the benefit that they may have a reaction where they can leave a thrall anytime it was damaged as a reaction causing them to only take half damage from the attack, leaving the thrall to automatically crumble under the attack.

[GameDesignerDM]

Ravingdork wrote:

I expect the necromancer won't have real undead minions, but rather class abilities and magical effects that pretend to be. I predict that, at least initially, the necromancer will be another disaster akin to the Swarmkeeper archetype.

They literally summon physical things that are undead.

[Losonti]

OrochiFuror wrote:

Yeah, that has to have touch range. Otherwise it's auto win against any non aoe, flying, burrowing enemy that doesn't have 35+ range.

At least in the playtest, the range is 30 feet. One of the thralls, no matter how many you summon, also makes a melee strike using your spell attack modifier, for 1d6 damage (adding 1d6 every 2 spell ranks).

Quote:

I expect the necromancer won't have real undead minions, but rather class abilities and magical effects that pretend to be.

Mechanically, thralls are creatures but aren't minions. They have no actions, no AC, and no saves.

[Zoken44]

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

[Squiggit]

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

Witches and Bards can only cast one of their unique type of focus spell per turn, but there's no general rule.

[Losonti]

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

It is a focus cantrip, but there's no general rule prohibiting you from casting multiple focus spells each turn. Witches, for example, have to abide by that with their hexes, but that's a property of the Hex trait rather than focus spells as a whole. They're still free to cast other focus spells that aren't hexes.

[Zoken44]

Thank you @Squiggit and @Losonti

Hey, what's the Class HP per level for these? What about armor/weapon proficiencies?

[BotBrain]

Losonti wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

It is a focus cantrip, but there's no general rule prohibiting you from casting multiple focus spells each turn. Witches, for example, have to abide by that with their hexes, but that's a property of the Hex trait rather than focus spells as a whole. They're still free to cast other focus spells that aren't hexes.

Do we know if Necromancer has a similar limitation, because I'm thinking it through in my head and getting 3 attacks with no penalty in a round is obviously incorrect but I don't know how else to interpret it.

[Perpdepog]

kaid wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Easl wrote:

pH unbalanced wrote:

Necromancer is an int-based, prepared, occult caster with 2 slots per rank. At level 1 they get a focus cantrip called Create Thrall that, as 1 action, makes a thrall w/in 30ft that lasts a minute. Thralls are creatures with 1 hit point that are always hit by attacks and always fail saving throws. They have no actions, but can provide flanking (some feats/focus spells let you move thralls or have them attack with your spell attack modifier). You can destroy your thralls to do various things...

Wow that doesn't sound like a minion master at all. It sounds more like a bank-resources-before-the-fight-then-spend-them-during concept. Personally I'm okay with that, but it's probably not the concept that a lot of the folks clamoring for a necromancer wanted.

This is the complaint I'm most expecting to see once the playtest drops, honestly. People are going to hear necromancer, jump to a game like Diablo II in their heads, and then either be frustrated they can't have giant blobs of guys, or have to wait a long time to have a mechanic that simulates them.

Honestly the thrall system seems way more diablo necro than I was expecting they would let it. You can pop out a lot of thralls but they are super squishy and totally disposable. I would bet there will be feats that let you boss a blob of them around so it probably will scratch that itch pretty well.

I hope so. This thrall system sounds like it's got lots of promise and also sounds like it'll avoid the time issues with having loads of minions, so the more people's playstyles it can stretch to fit the better.

I'm looking forward to this class more and more; not only does it sound like a blast to play, and I'm a sucker for necromancers in most games, but so far it also sounds like something you could pretty easily rejigger to use other kinds of thralls. A primal caster summoning up short-lived plants, for example, sounds super doable from what I'm hearing.

[Perpdepog]

BotBrain wrote:

Losonti wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

It is a focus cantrip, but there's no general rule prohibiting you from casting multiple focus spells each turn. Witches, for example, have to abide by that with their hexes, but that's a property of the Hex trait rather than focus spells as a whole. They're still free to cast other focus spells that aren't hexes.

Do we know if Necromancer has a similar limitation, because I'm thinking it through in my head and getting 3 attacks with no penalty in a round is obviously incorrect but I don't know how else to interpret it.

It does sound like these attacks will be pretty weak, at least, if this does end up being true. Capping out at 5d6 at level 17, and requiring an attack roll each time, doesn't sound like a terribly reliable way to do damage, even if it does sound funny.

[Zoken44]

I'm starting to realize, necromancer has the potential to be an interesting magical Tank/control build. Just from the utility of being able to put even one extra body in the way per round, that's easily going to let you control where an enemy can move, and since while they are auto hit, they absorb damage. Because all the damage put into them is damage the enemy didn't put into everyone else.

Now, I'm fair certain they're going to slap that same witch/bard restriction on create thrall, being able to add so many extra bodies later in the game would be broken. But still, even one or two per round can really soak damage for the team and control terrain.

[BotBrain]

Perpdepog wrote:

BotBrain wrote:

Losonti wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

It is a focus cantrip, but there's no general rule prohibiting you from casting multiple focus spells each turn. Witches, for example, have to abide by that with their hexes, but that's a property of the Hex trait rather than focus spells as a whole. They're still free to cast other focus spells that aren't hexes.

Do we know if Necromancer has a similar limitation, because I'm thinking it through in my head and getting 3 attacks with no penalty in a round is obviously incorrect but I don't know how else to interpret it.

It does sound like these attacks will be pretty weak, at least, if this does end up being true. Capping out at 5d6 at level 17, and requiring an attack roll each time, doesn't sound like a terribly reliable way to do damage, even if it does sound funny.

Even so, that's essentially 3 weapon attacks with a d6 weapon.

[Justnobodyfqwl]

BotBrain wrote:

Do we know if Necromancer has a similar limitation, because I'm thinking it through in my head and getting 3 attacks with no penalty in a round is obviously incorrect but I don't know how else to interpret it.

Bet you dollars to donuts the thralls share your MAP

[BotBrain]

Justnobodyfqwl wrote:

BotBrain wrote:

Do we know if Necromancer has a similar limitation, because I'm thinking it through in my head and getting 3 attacks with no penalty in a round is obviously incorrect but I don't know how else to interpret it.

Bet you dollars to donuts the thralls share your MAP

Oh duh they could. Okay i'm fine then.

[Zoken44]

Still, popping three bodies to stand in the way, and potentially do something else the next round, that would make the enemy spend damage attacking them instead of the team. Even if it's their last attack of the round, that's an action they lost.

[kaid]

Zoken44 wrote:

Still, popping three bodies to stand in the way, and potentially do something else the next round, that would make the enemy spend damage attacking them instead of the team. Even if it's their last attack of the round, that's an action they lost.

That is the interesting thing. Enemies can pop them easily but it takes actions to pop the thralls so do you try to pop them to clear them out or ignore them. If you pop them you are spending resources to do it but if you don't then there are bombs just looming around you ticking away until the necro pops them.

Very like the initial launch of diablo 4 just about anything can pop your skellies but replacing them is a snap of your fingers so it works out to be fairly tanky just through ablative minions.

[Xenocrat]

Enemies can just Tumble Through (I haven't seen any reason they have a reflex DC that would prevent auto success) and just eat one square of difficult terrain and not be able to do a different stride action as the cost of doing business to get past them.

There's also a feat that has the same trigger as Reactive Strike (so moving past) that lets you detomate a thrall. 2d10 basic reflex scaling to 4d10, so like a weak weapon strike when someone runs past one or does a manipulate action or whatever.

BotBrain wrote:

Losonti wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

It is a focus cantrip, but there's no general rule prohibiting you from casting multiple focus spells each turn. Witches, for example, have to abide by that with their hexes, but that's a property of the Hex trait rather than focus spells as a whole. They're still free to cast other focus spells that aren't hexes.

Do we know if Necromancer has a similar limitation, because I'm thinking it through in my head and getting 3 attacks with no penalty in a round is obviously incorrect but I don't know how else to interpret it.

They do share your MAP.

[Castilliano]

I hope they ignore Splash damage. There might be other trivial AoE effects too that I'd like ignored, maybe spells/effects/creatures far too many levels below them? (And w/o adding rolling which is the whole point and greatness of these thralls).

I think spamming the thralls would backfire unless having few encounters that day. Necro has too few spells IMO, and not having a Focus Point in reserve for a second wave of baddies is risky.

Also would like a Reaction that lets Necros do their "reabsorb for a Focus Point" trick so they can keep churning out undead (not that it would help spammers who lose several in one round).

Will creatures recognize the triviality of the thralls? Or their tie to the Necro? Either would alter enemy tactics.

I think it'd be funny (yet on theme) if Necros had a "You're Next" type feat, maybe tied to them animating an enemy. Speaking of using enemy bodies...how much of that will be included? Yay, if Corpse Explosion. :)

[Dragonchess Player]

Squiggit wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

Witches and Bards can only cast one of their unique type of focus spell per turn, but there's no general rule.

Note that the reason bards and witches get that limitation is because (at least some) composition cantrips and hex cantrips are single action spells.

[Blave]

Castilliano wrote:

I think spamming the thralls would backfire unless having few encounters that day. Necro has too few spells IMO, and not having a Focus Point in reserve for a second wave of baddies is risky.

You can spam Thralls as much as you like since summoning them is a focus cantrip that doesn't cost a focus point at all.

Quote:

Also would like a Reaction that lets Necros do their "reabsorb for a Focus Point" trick so they can keep churning out undead (not that it would help spammers who lose several in one round).

Not a reaction, but the necro does get the ability to destroy one thrall within 15 ft or so to regain one focus point. The ability has a cooldown of 10 minutes. I think it was a feat, but I'm not entirely sure about that right now. It might simply be the necro's way of refocusing, which i personally would find very funny.

[Blave]

Dragonchess Player wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

Witches and Bards can only cast one of their unique type of focus spell per turn, but there's no general rule.

Note that the reason bards and witches get that limitation is because (at least some) composition cantrips and hex cantrips are single action spells.

Create Thrall is also a single action and doesn't seem to have any limitation on the number of times you can cast it per turn.

[Unicore]

At higher levels, a lot of creatures have auras and AoE attacks they were going to use anyway. I don't think the Thralls left around on the battlefield are going to be that big of an issue in most encounters. It will be much more of a parlor trick.

The annoying thing about this class is going to be the exploration mode delays/ sending them in on every trap/arguing with players about how many will reasonably be available at the start of an encounter. I am hoping the "doesn't really move" will be enough of a deterrent to players wanting to start encounters with more than 1 or 2 of them.

[Squiggit]

I mean I imagine the baseline will be the assumption you start with none of the (precluding some ability that gives you thralls when you roll initiative or something). PF2 generally isn't built around the assumption of spending encounter level actions before an encounter.

... I know it was mentioned earlier that the class is Prepared, but per people seeing the playtest document, does it gain spells like a Wizard/Witch or a Cleric/Druid?

Xenocrat wrote:

Enemies can just Tumble Through (I haven't seen any reason they have a reflex DC that would prevent auto success) and just eat one square of difficult terrain and not be able to do a different stride action as the cost of doing business to get past them.

It kind of seems totally on brand for Paizo to never address this ever and leave players arguing online over whether or not there's a relevant DC.

[Xenocrat]

The bones subclass lets your thralls survive a reflex (but not splash or fort) AOE on a DC 15 flat check. Imagine being the lucky one or two to survive the dragon blasting everyone.

[kaid]

Unicore wrote:

At higher levels, a lot of creatures have auras and AoE attacks they were going to use anyway. I don't think the Thralls left around on the battlefield are going to be that big of an issue in most encounters. It will be much more of a parlor trick.

The annoying thing about this class is going to be the exploration mode delays/ sending them in on every trap/arguing with players about how many will reasonably be available at the start of an encounter. I am hoping the "doesn't really move" will be enough of a deterrent to players wanting to start encounters with more than 1 or 2 of them.

Honestly a necro using minions to find/remove traps is pretty on brand for a necro. I sort of suspect thralls probably won't carry over from one fight to another. It is likely a case where you just spend your first turn dredging some up and given they do an attack when summoned it is not an unreasonable opening round.

[Losonti]

Squiggit wrote:

I know it was mentioned earlier that the class is Prepared, but per people seeing the playtest document, does it gain spells like a Wizard/Witch or a Cleric/Druid?

Seems to be like Wizard/Witch. Instead of a spellbook or a familiar, you have a "dirge" that exists inside of your soul, so presumably it cannot be taken, destroyed, killed, etc.

Quote:

I sort of suspect thralls probably won't carry over from one fight to another.

They only last for one minute and can't move without a feat (that might also be a focus spell?) so yeah unless the fight happens immediately after you won't be keeping them around from one to the next.

[GameDesignerDM]

Beyond the mechanics, I'm excited to brainstorm what my Necromancer's Thralls might look like - that will be fun to see from other folks, too, I think.

[Squark]

I wonder how Create Thrall interacts with the Repeat a Spell exploration activity. Definitely needs to be addressed.

[rainzax]

Blave wrote:

Dragonchess Player wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I'm lost, my understanding is "Create Thrall" is a FOCUS cantrip. I could have sworn it was a rule that you cannot cast more than one focus spell per turn

Witches and Bards can only cast one of their unique type of focus spell per turn, but there's no general rule.

Note that the reason bards and witches get that limitation is because (at least some) composition cantrips and hex cantrips are single action spells.

Create Thrall is also a single action and doesn't seem to have any limitation on the number of times you can cast it per turn.

This may be one of the core “Tests of Play” that Paizo is effectively daring the community to “break”!

[PossibleCabbage]

AestheticDialectic wrote:

OrochiFuror wrote:

One action to create within 30 feet and takes up a square? That's broken, hello new bonewall/bonecage. Every turn you block off 3 sides of a boss, if you ever get more then you completely surround one enemy every turn and then can double layer thrallwall. If taking away actions is the name of the game, necro wins.

This is probably why they always fail saves, always get hit and have 1 HP, but I gotta see this in action, but I think it is probably exactly as good as it needs to be

Yeah, a lot of monsters are just going to have an AoE option to immediately clear the thralls off the board, and then it's just an action sink for them (which is good, but not broken.) Like making Treerazer have to use Defoliate every turn is fine, since that leaves him with one action so he's not closing very fast on people attacking him from far away, but there's also going to be a range on the thralls so the first person he's going to bullseye is "the necromancer" in this situation.

[Justnobodyfqwl]

GameDesignerDM wrote:

Beyond the mechanics, I'm excited to brainstorm what my Necromancer's Thralls might look like - that will be fun to see from other folks, too, I think.

Three seasonal Necromancers-

A frosty necromancer, who uses ice-preserved corpses that unfortunately tend to melt

An expert eleven craftsman, who uses enchanted pine wood and holly to wrap around bones and animate skeletons bursting with leaves

An old curmudgeon who summons three spirit thralls a turn- each one representing the sins of her past, present, and future

Or maybe Starfinder 2e Necromancers-

An Eox captain, a loyal skeleton general who animates other skeletons for cover

A Vesk Valkyrie Caller, who summons spirits of their fellow fallen soldiers to offer tactical flanks and be worshipped as saints

A Borai Post-Death Contract Lawyer, who summons zombies that are just candidates from Wheel Of Monsters that still technically are under contract

[Perpdepog]

Justnobodyfqwl wrote:

GameDesignerDM wrote:

Beyond the mechanics, I'm excited to brainstorm what my Necromancer's Thralls might look like - that will be fun to see from other folks, too, I think.

Three seasonal Necromancers-

A frosty necromancer, who uses ice-preserved corpses that unfortunately tend to melt

An expert eleven craftsman, who uses enchanted pine wood and holly to wrap around bones and animate skeletons bursting with leaves

An old curmudgeon who summons three spirit thralls a turn- each one representing the sins of her past, present, and future

Or maybe Starfinder 2e Necromancers-

An Eox captain, a loyal skeleton general who animates other skeletons for cover

A Vesk Valkyrie Caller, who summons spirits of their fellow fallen soldiers to offer tactical flanks and be worshipped as saints

A Borai Post-Death Contract Lawyer, who summons zombies that are just candidates from Wheel Of Monsters that still technically are under contract

With Roll for Combat releasing a more traditional take on the dullahan, I'm imagining a dullahan necromancer whose thralls are spirits from their Coach of the Silent. Perhaps those they previously defeated and hunted down, or maybe just a bunch of old battle buddies who kicked the bucket ages ago, but still feel like sticking around.

[OrochiFuror]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Yeah, a lot of monsters are just going to have an AoE option to immediately clear the thralls off the board, and then it's just an action sink for them (which is good, but not broken.) Like making Treerazer have to use Defoliate every turn is fine, since that leaves him with one action so he's not closing very fast on people attacking him from far away, but there's also going to be a range on the thralls so the first person he's going to bullseye is "the necromancer" in this situation.

The risk that there are certain creatures you could effectively keep slow2 or 3 on every turn by piling up thralls they can't easily get through is too high IMO. Especially in the mid levels.

Very few if any larger creatures are likely to have acrobatics to tumble through.
Having a no resource ability that can easily cost enemies one to two actions a turn is a bit too much I think.

Sadly if you can't have thralls in exploration mode, I already know some people here who are going to cry it's not a minion master/pet build real necromancer. Sad if we can't have a troop of undead that's a slow resource drain over a day, surrounded by a mjnion army (even if its more like a platoon or squad) is heavily ingrained in the necro fantasy.

Sadly I've played a reanimator and the rituals for minions are hot hot garbage. Summoning spells that cost you gold, very rough.
I wonder if necro might tempt me to try summoner archetype, wonder how that might pan out. Summoner and undead master for exploration undead fulfilment and thralls for combat focus.

[ottdmk]

"Sacrificing thralls... is there anything it can't do?" - To paraphrase a certain lich.

[Xenocrat]

OrochiFuror wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Yeah, a lot of monsters are just going to have an AoE option to immediately clear the thralls off the board, and then it's just an action sink for them (which is good, but not broken.) Like making Treerazer have to use Defoliate every turn is fine, since that leaves him with one action so he's not closing very fast on people attacking him from far away, but there's also going to be a range on the thralls so the first person he's going to bullseye is "the necromancer" in this situation.

The risk that there are certain creatures you could effectively keep slow2 or 3 on every turn by piling up thralls they can't easily get through is too high IMO. Especially in the mid levels.

Very few if any larger creatures are likely to have acrobatics to tumble through.

Tumble Through is untrained, it seems likely they’ll auto succeed just as thralls are auto hit and auto fail saves.

[Witch of Miracles]

This does create a very funny knowledge check for beginner GMs, though. They should probably just treat thralls as difficult terrain or not have them block movement at all to avoid confusion.

[PossibleCabbage]

One imagines that "I'm going to waste the monster's time by throwing thrall after thrall after thrall at it" is a good thing to playtest. Like try doing a fight against a dragon and see how it goes.

[Castilliano]

Don't all Focus Cantrips cost a Focus Point?
If not, wouldn't that just be a Cantrip? (albeit class specific)

What's a Necro's hp & armor proficiency?
Or the rune guy's while we're at it.

[PossibleCabbage]

Castilliano wrote:

Don't all Focus Cantrips cost a Focus Point?

If not, wouldn't that just be a Cantrip? (albeit class specific)

I assume they're going to be like the Bard's Composition Cantrips or the Witch's Hex Cantrips, they just didn't want to give the specific name for the Necromancer's thing in order to avoid overwhelming people with new terminology. The word "cantrip" never gets used in the context of things that cost a focus point, things like Fire Ray and Elemental Toss are just "Focus Spells."

But we don't have to wait that long to read the class.

[Castilliano]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Castilliano wrote:

Don't all Focus Cantrips cost a Focus Point?

If not, wouldn't that just be a Cantrip? (albeit class specific)

I assume they're going to be like the Bard's Composition Cantrips or the Witch's Hex Cantrips, they just didn't want to give the specific name for the Necromancer's thing in order to avoid overwhelming people with new terminology. The word "cantrip" never gets used in the context of things that cost a focus point, things like Fire Ray and Elemental Toss are just "Focus Spells."

But we don't have to wait that long to read the class.

Duh, I should've recognized that.

Might call it a Cantrip (and have it cost a Focus Point* so it doesn't interact w/ abilities that work with Focus Spells or specifically not with Cantrips.

* Or something else?
I guess it depends on how much it scales. And it sounds like there's risk of multiplicative effects having a disproportional impact.

[Perpdepog]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

One imagines that "I'm going to waste the monster's time by throwing thrall after thrall after thrall at it" is a good thing to playtest. Like try doing a fight against a dragon and see how it goes.

Dragons are going to be a sore spot for necromancers, I imagine, since two of a dragon's main qualities are that it can fly, and has big AoE attacks.

[Berselius]

I wonder if we'll get other 1e Pathfinder wizard subschools as classes? I think my GF would absolutely love to get an Enchanter class (especially one that gives the ability to afflict mind-effecting abilities/spells on creatures that are otherwise immune or mindless).

[Justnobodyfqwl]

Berselius wrote:

I wonder if we'll get other 1e Pathfinder wizard subschools as classes? I think my GF would absolutely love to get an Enchanter class (especially one that gives the ability to afflict mind-effecting abilities/spells on creatures that are otherwise immune or mindless).

I 100% believe the motivation of the Necromancer was "Necromancers in pop culture", not "the Wizard school turned into a full class".

I don't think anyone is asking for, or jumping to make, "the Abjurer class".

[Marisha]

Berselius wrote:

I wonder if we'll get other 1e Pathfinder wizard subschools as classes? I think my GF would absolutely love to get an Enchanter class (especially one that gives the ability to afflict mind-effecting abilities/spells on creatures that are otherwise immune or mindless).

I have been thinking about this a bit. An Abjurer could be really fun as like a magical counterpart to Guardian, or maybe a conjurer/teleporter type class? IDK just a lot of fun conceptual spaces that could still be explored! I know I'm already considering how a class archetype could switch necromancer to a sort of summoning type horde caster but I'm definitely getting ahead of myself.

[PossibleCabbage]

Perpdepog wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

One imagines that "I'm going to waste the monster's time by throwing thrall after thrall after thrall at it" is a good thing to playtest. Like try doing a fight against a dragon and see how it goes.

Dragons are going to be a sore spot for necromancers, I imagine, since two of a dragon's main qualities are that it can fly, and has big AoE attacks.

I just prefer to see "I suspect this class ability will go really well/really badly in these certain kinds of fights" as a reason to playtest those specific things.

[Squark]

Castilliano wrote:

Don't all Focus Cantrips cost a Focus Point?

If not, wouldn't that just be a Cantrip? (albeit class specific)

What's a Necro's hp & armor proficiency?
Or the rune guy's while we're at it.

Quite the opposite. Focus cantrips never cost a focus point. Focus cantrips are so named because they're not part of the regular spell lists, nor because they cost Focus points.

Runesmith is proficient with simple and martial weapons and up to medium armor. Not aure about the hp or the Necromancer.