Necromantic Presence doesn't affect HD control limits! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Necromantic Presence doesn't affect HD control limits! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
EvilVegan
04-30-07, 01:34 PM I've been working on some dread necro stuff and reading guides and all of them say

"Don't take necromantic presence if you rebuke" because they claim that if you have it you would be unable to control things that you just rebuked.

The logic works like this:

Necromantic presence (NP) adds turn resistance to anything you control.
You can control up to your turning level in HD.
Turn resistance adds to HD for rebuking

Therefore you can't control the things you just rebuked.

But I don't think this is right.

Turn resistance only adds to effective hit die for turn attempts, but doesn't specifically mention it as affecting control limits of commanded undead.

Not only does this make necromantic presence work as intended, it also leads to the fact that if you successfully command a vampire, or other creature with turn resistance, you don't count his turn resistance against your control pool for rebuking.

Thoughts?
katarl
04-30-07, 03:23 PM They're taking quite a strict stance when it comes to the rules aren't they? I can't really blame them, if they didn't they could be called munchkins- some of the stuff in Ks guide and the necromancers guide is really cheeky when it comes to the rules.

However, i didn't write these guides... and I agree with you totally.

But I do for two different reasons to yours, I think it is unfair to penalise a necromancer for taking the feat- it doesn't fit the flavour and is pedantic to the extreme, and because the rebuked creature is not under your control when it is rebuked, and therefore does not benefit from it. The commanding and rebuking is done at the same time, so of course it doesn't increase its turn resistance!
EvilVegan
05-03-07, 08:51 AM Any other thoughts?
forsaken1111
05-03-07, 11:09 AM Seems obvious to me.

Feat doesn't apply until you're in control. It says so in the text of the feat... only adds the turn resistance to things under your control and in range.

Its not like you have to maintain control once its established... they aren't going to 'use your necromantic presence to break free of your control'. Seems silly to think it would.
FeceMan
05-03-07, 11:12 AM Here are my thoughts:

K's guide is blatantly wrong on a number of things. I have brought this to K's attention. He has, however, ignored them and essentially told me to STFU because it's his guide and he's infallible.

You're right about necromantic presence. Only a RAW-******* would assert that it affects contol limits.
EvilVegan
05-03-07, 12:57 PM how about applying to the owner of the feat (if he's undead)? :D

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
EvilVegan 04-30-07, 01:34 PM	I've been working on some dread necro stuff and reading guides and all of them say "Don't take necromantic presence if you rebuke" because they claim that if you have it you would be unable to control things that you just rebuked. The logic works like this: Necromantic presence (NP) adds turn resistance to anything you control. You can control up to your turning level in HD. Turn resistance adds to HD for rebuking Therefore you can't control the things you just rebuked. But I don't think this is right. Turn resistance only adds to effective hit die for turn attempts, but doesn't specifically mention it as affecting control limits of commanded undead. Not only does this make necromantic presence work as intended, it also leads to the fact that if you successfully command a vampire, or other creature with turn resistance, you don't count his turn resistance against your control pool for rebuking. Thoughts?
katarl 04-30-07, 03:23 PM	They're taking quite a strict stance when it comes to the rules aren't they? I can't really blame them, if they didn't they could be called munchkins- some of the stuff in Ks guide and the necromancers guide is really cheeky when it comes to the rules. However, i didn't write these guides... and I agree with you totally. But I do for two different reasons to yours, I think it is unfair to penalise a necromancer for taking the feat- it doesn't fit the flavour and is pedantic to the extreme, and because the rebuked creature is not under your control when it is rebuked, and therefore does not benefit from it. The commanding and rebuking is done at the same time, so of course it doesn't increase its turn resistance!
EvilVegan 05-03-07, 08:51 AM	Any other thoughts?
forsaken1111 05-03-07, 11:09 AM	Seems obvious to me. Feat doesn't apply until you're in control. It says so in the text of the feat... only adds the turn resistance to things under your control and in range. Its not like you have to maintain control once its established... they aren't going to 'use your necromantic presence to break free of your control'. Seems silly to think it would.
FeceMan 05-03-07, 11:12 AM	Here are my thoughts: K's guide is blatantly wrong on a number of things. I have brought this to K's attention. He has, however, ignored them and essentially told me to STFU because it's his guide and he's infallible. You're right about necromantic presence. Only a RAW-******* would assert that it affects contol limits.
EvilVegan 05-03-07, 12:57 PM	how about applying to the owner of the feat (if he's undead)? :D