Necromancer

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

TiaNadiezja

Aug 28, 2014 9:10:16

So... I have a player who's interested in the Necromancer. The problem is that, from our reading, the Necromancer is basically inferior to every other wizard subclass (less in-subclass spells, inferior features, a level 10 feature that will come up rarely unless the DM populates the game with absolute hordes of powerful undead, et cetera).

 

What makes a necromancer good?

#2

Hailrobonia

Aug 28, 2014 9:21:06

Well, fashion has a price.

 

Seriously, though, at least with spell selection there is plenty of room to grow, and who knows what other options (feats, alternate class features, etc.) may be available in the future.

 

 

#3

Thoughts_My_Aim

Aug 28, 2014 9:20:50

Undead minions are sufficiently powerful that some say they're OP. The ability to control four undead minions for every spell slot you expend is extremely powerful.

 

The downside is that this *does* make the necromancer rely heavily on minions, which can slow down or even dominate combat.

#4

Novacat

Aug 28, 2014 9:21:18

If you're going to create undead, no one does it better than the necromancer. 

#5

Jharii

Aug 28, 2014 9:24:58

And all mages are useless in a world void of magic.  Barbers are useless in a world void of hair.  Wheels are useless in a world void of roads.

Sounds like the DM and the player need to get together and have a little chit chat to make sure the player's choice is viable.

 

#6

TiaNadiezja

Aug 28, 2014 9:25:26

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
#7

TiaNadiezja

Aug 28, 2014 9:26:32

Jharii wrote:
#8

Thoughts_My_Aim

Aug 28, 2014 9:41:06

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#9

mellored

Aug 28, 2014 9:51:54

They aren't weak, unless your DM speciflcy avoids letting you have corpses.  And i've never seen a campaign that lacks corpses.

And even then, you can repeatedly animate the ones that die.  So a few corpses could last many levels.

 

They can be pretty spikey though.

 

Having an ally cleric sit in the middle of your army with crusader's mantle will have them doing insane damage.

But then the cleric get's charmed, and casts turn undead, and now your SoL.

 

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#10

Jharii

Aug 28, 2014 9:56:19

TiaNadiezja wrote:
(Reply to #7)

Lord_Ventnor

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#12

Mechatarrasque

Aug 28, 2014 11:12:47

In most campaigns undead are pretty common enemies over most levels, so it seems like a necromancer is a pretty safe choice.  Places where undead are unlikely (like the Elemental Chaos or Mt. Celestia) are mostly more appropriate for higher levels at which point most parties have a lot of options.  If I was DMing it, I would refluff some undead as the "blessed dead" in Mt. Celestia anyway, it isn't like the Monster Manual overflows with natives, at least what I can make out of the appendix on Enworld.........of course, a necromancer taking control of "blessed dead" might bring some angelic/archon-istic wrath on the party.

#13

NN1

Aug 28, 2014 11:23:54

Necromancers are still wizards when you strip them down.  True their 6th level power requires undead minions to be useful, but it can be quite useful.  If you don't want undead menageries in your game, then you should talk to your players since that is a big part of necromancers.

#14

OrwellianHaggis

Aug 28, 2014 13:18:11

If I was DMing and a player cast to raise some dead, I'd ask them what battle took place here/why were four people buried here/what was the name of the church that one stood here/etc and add a feature to the world. I'm looking forward to creating a multiclass fighter/necromancer or eldritch knight with those spells. I'd use the skeletons as aides.

#15

TiaNadiezja

Aug 28, 2014 13:44:11

NN1 wrote:
#16

Setzer_G

Aug 28, 2014 13:55:19

I like it even without the undead. The self healing capability seems really nice, especially out of combat. DIE LOW HP WILDLIFE! The screams of squirrells and rabbits. Ha! MWAHAHAHA

 

....oh. Well. I got off topic a little bit. I don't think enough focus gets given to Necromancy as a non-psychotic discipline. Neutral or Good practitioners of NEcromancy still have a few options here at a cursory glance. I'd agree there doesn't seem like "enough" compared to other specialties, but I think it captures the flavor well.

#17

TiaNadiezja

Aug 28, 2014 14:21:43

Setzer_G wrote:
#18

Setzer_G

Aug 28, 2014 14:41:33

expending spell slots to gain Undead like properties. Healing your minions with Necromancy spells. Changing damage types of some spells to Necrotic....see...5 minutes and these are all abilities that could have made it better.

#19

Kalani

Aug 28, 2014 14:37:01

OrwellianHaggis wrote:
#20

NN1

Aug 28, 2014 14:48:57

Something I found interesting ind the schools of magic sidebar on p203 of the PHB:

 

"Creating undead through the use of necromancy spells such as animate dead is not a good act, and only evil casters use such spells frequently."

 

While this is far from a glowing endorcement of undead animation, it is curious that the authors stopped short of blatently saying undead creation was evil by default, as is done in many previous books.  It is merely described as not good and said that only evil casters do it frequently.  The implication is that occasional undead creation, while likely unpopular with the locals, can be consistent with a neutral, or possibly even a good, alignment.  This won't necessarily mean that you won't draw fear and anger from NPCs (or even PCs) if you animate undead, and the DM is perfectly justified in saying "undead animation is EVIL in my setting, PERIOD, end of discussion."  Heck, just having a small military force is enough to draw the attention of local leaders before we talk about undead.

 

This also opens the door for a peaceful NPC necromancer for the DM to play with.  "After the war, we had mountains of corpses and most of the able-boddied were dead or crippled!  People were going to starve come winter if we couldn't get some help in the fields!  Many thought me mad, but we were all desperate.  After the crisis was averted I thought to discontinue the project, but people started volunteering to trade their corpse upon their death in exchange for financial support for their family.  I agreed.  I keep a moderate number of undead to work my farms and to serve as defense for the town.  All my current undead are preserved and have covered faces as a courtesy to the locals and each was animated with the consent of the deceased (obviously this was impossible for the first batch).  Kill me if you must, but know that the food in the orphanage is supplied by my farms and make sure you kill all my undead, for if I am not free to reassert control tomorrow morning, they will be set loose!"  I want to see the paladin squirm!

#21

Setzer_G

Aug 28, 2014 14:56:27

This is certainly up to subjective morality. In Karnnath, Eberron, it is a great honor to be animated as a zombie or skeleton after a long/gloriouos service in the Karnnathi military. It is a true reward of patriotism and service to be granted it. To them, that is a Good thing, especially with the ambiguity of what happens to your soul after death. The book gives you some basic fluff to get the gears turning. One thing I really like about it is that it is vague enough to allow you the freedom for that to be subjective in your own games.

 

EDIT: I only mention because a PC for an Eberron game soon is looking to play a Karnathi Paladin, but lack of classic necromancy in the spell list needs some tweeking. 

#22

NN1

Aug 28, 2014 15:25:14

Setzer_G wrote:
#23

Thank_Dog

Aug 28, 2014 16:12:19

TiaNadiezja wrote:
(Reply to #15)

NN1

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#25

Danny_Montanny

Aug 28, 2014 16:59:44

You may think my methods detestable, but when the only thing standing between you and certain death are these "crimes against nature", as you call them, you'll be singing a different tune.

 

Dead zombies = alive adventurers.

#26

ChristopherGroves

Aug 28, 2014 17:12:15

The big question for me is in the mechanics of "command".  You can control multiple at once if you "issue them the same command".

 

This needs a bit of specificity, as there's a big difference between "you decide what each and every thing does like it was you" and ordering it to "attack that dude" and having the DM decide that they don't auto-flank or space themselves perfectly, etc.

 

That means that the necro's performance has a great deal of investment in whatever the DM decides, which is really table-dependent.

#27

blackermetal

Aug 28, 2014 17:52:12

I gave up on playing a necromancer when the other two wizards in my party were also planning to be necros.  Does a necromancer ever gain access to Inflict Wounds or is that just a cleric spell?

#28

Chaosmancer

Aug 28, 2014 19:16:38

For me most of the wizards get their iconic cool school abilitiy at level 2

 

Abjuration gets their Ward

Divination gets their Portent

 

Necromancer's get Grim Harvest, kill enemies with spells gain hp = x2 spell level or x3 spell level if it is Necromancy spell

 

Commanding undead is cool (especially at higher levels when you create wights and wraiths and such) and the ability to command Undead NPCS can be really cool.

 

However, much like all wizards it is the spell selection that informs your primary abilities. Other than the obvious animation spells and speak with dead. Bestow Curse, Blight, Chill Touch, Clone, Astral Projection, Eyebite (which is way different from 4e, I like) False Life, Fiegn Death, Magic Jar, Ray of Sickness, Vampiric Touch

 

Sure, "Any wizard can get those spells" but why would an Evoker grab them? Evokers want to focus on Evocation. Picking a school also informs your spell selction. A non-necromancer might like Vampiric Touch for 3d6 and recovering half that damage, but you're a master of life and death and your vampiric touch also gives you 9 hp when you kill a creature with it. You are the master of status effects against foes, and chill touch is really awesome (after being hit enemies can't recover hp until start of your next turn).

 

Actually, tangent question, is a spell's level equal to the level listed on the spell or the level cast? I want to say it is the "cast level" because of dispel magic and similiar effects. If it is, that means grim Harvest can give you 27hp (9*3) on a single target death. That isn't bad

(Reply to #27)

NN1

blackermetal wrote:
#30

TiaNadiezja

Aug 28, 2014 20:42:48

NN1 wrote:
(Reply to #30)

NN1

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#32

TiaNadiezja

Aug 28, 2014 20:55:15

NN1 wrote:
#33

THEMNGMNT

Aug 28, 2014 21:57:00

I agree that the Necromancer seems light on flavorful mechanics. A shame.

#34

Thoughts_My_Aim

Aug 29, 2014 2:08:12

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#35

Mephi1234

Aug 29, 2014 4:02:53

I agree that the Wizard Necromancer lacks a bit of a pop to it.     

 

Signature necromancer abilities include:  Corpse manipulation (create undead, gentle repose, feign death, etc), vampiric life drain, curses (Bestow curse, blindness/deafness, contagion, eyebite), and direct damage with raw necrotic energy.      There's a bit of vampy life draining.   But everything else is pretty much dominated by raising undead.    No boost to the various curses, nothing to the necrotic damage spells.    Half of the necromancer spells get no love from the subclass.*

 

I wonder if the overlap with warlock is partially to blame.   Warlocks seem to be really bad at low level summon/animate undead spells for some reason (avoiding abuse with spell slots, probably, as they get the high level summons/undead spells in daily form with no problem) but get lots of necrotic damage, curses, and life drains.    Its kind of their specialty.   

(Reply to #34)

Ghaliyah

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
#37

Mephi1234

Aug 29, 2014 4:40:36

Ghaliyah wrote:
#38

Thoughts_My_Aim

Aug 29, 2014 5:33:42

Ghaliyah wrote:
#39

Mechatarrasque

Aug 29, 2014 10:12:35

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#40

Timborama

Aug 29, 2014 10:23:23

NN1 wrote:
(Reply to #38)

NN1

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
(Reply to #40)

NN1

Timborama wrote:
#43

Sorxores

Aug 29, 2014 10:48:25

TiaNadiezja wrote:
(Reply to #43)

NN1

Sorxores wrote:
#45

Chaosmancer

Aug 29, 2014 12:34:43

I'm not sure about monsters, but I know the Harm spell reduces your max hp and I'm pretty sure there are other spells.

 

Liches I think traditionally can do stuff like this, and I remember the succubus from the Penny Arcade game did it, so demons and devils are possible.

(Reply to #38)

Ghaliyah

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
#47

KarlB

Aug 29, 2014 14:28:35

Hehe, you don't think Necromancer feels exciting because you're not into that kind of playstyle. For someone like myself who pretty much always plays Necromancer style classes in MMOs, Necromancers in 5th ed feel absolutely great :D

 

By the way, Grim Harvest is NOT minor at all. As odds are that some spell or other you cast will be downing mobs every turn, or most every turn, that's a steady stream of HP you are getting back *FOR FREE*. Can I stress the latter enough? It's a heal that doesn't require an action or bonus action. It requires nothing other than what you would normally be doing anyway. Again, free heal. Free. Did I mention it's a free heal? Wizards are fragile. Anything that keeps their health up is a tremendous boon to their party.

 

Undead Thralls is really quite strong, not for the extra minion, but for the added damage and HP to your minions. That extra HP is the difference between surviving Fireballs or surviving it for one more round. Skeleton armies is basically a case of death by pinpricks ... except in this case, the pins are especially sharp and long.

 

That being said, as a DM, I'd make the player aware of the social dangers of calling upon whole armies of undead. Certainly, no town magistrate would let a known Necromancer anywhere near there from fear of him losing control of his undead army (which would happen if he doesn't recast it ... after all, the default behaviour of undead is to attack the living). So a wise Necromancer who doesn't want to live as a pariah and be hunted for the rest of his days had best be really freaking discreet about what he can do.

(Reply to #47)

Ghaliyah

KarlB wrote:
#49

Mechatarrasque

Aug 29, 2014 14:53:53

If the necromancer could be a shadow/specter/wraith animating one instead of a zombie/skeleton/ghoul animator, it seems like that could resolve most of the PR problems, as you don't have a physical army of undead running around.  Sure insubstantial undead suck as meat shields and in most editions they are nearly worthless in daylight, but their ability to survive to inflict damage over time seems like it would be worth it (and the fact that dungeons are often underground means you can ignore the daylight bit as long as no one casts a daylight type spell).

#50

Thoughts_My_Aim

Aug 29, 2014 15:44:12

Ghaliyah wrote:
#51

mellored

Aug 29, 2014 18:35:16

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
#52

Eldren73

Sep 07, 2014 9:38:19

I've always loved the idea of Necromancers.  Sadly, they've never been particularly well-implemented in Dungeons & Dragons.  2nd Edition made the first legitimate system attempt via specialists that were part of the Wizard overclass, but if I recall correctly, there were three schools of magic that were locked away as opposition schools for the Necromancer (one of which was Evocation, which should largely be a staple for every spellcaster in a game as combat-focused as D&D is), and the Necromancy school didn't have very many spells to begin with.  That latter failing has persisted through all of 3rd Edition (and now into Pathfinder).  4th Edition was laughable, as the "stuff every class into the same resource system" approach really just sandblasted any real flavor away from spellcasters.

 

It becomes additionally problematic if you're applying any sort of verisimilitude to a game world, even if you decide to let a player have a Necromancer.  While all the teeth of the alignment system have been removed in 4E and 5E (as opposed to 3.5 and Pathfinder, where alignment had very specific baked-in game mechanic effects), the reality remains: those who "regularly" animate the dead are "typically evil".  The reality is you're encountering a clash between social mores and the more objective cosmic implications of the nine alignments.  A Neutral Good person is going to want to help others through the most expedient methods possible at the moment.  If a ravening band of orcs has been marauding a village in the foothills, and loss of life has been significant, a Neutral Good Necromancer might logically look at all the bodies of the slain and think, "Sending wave after wave of zombies after those orcs in the dead of night will take care of the orc problem and cut down on the loss of remaining life."

 

But social mores have determined that animating a corpse and using it as a tool is somehow "wrong".  So the choice needs to be made in a given campaign setting whether the nine alignments are broad cosmic concepts, or situational ethics dependent on local interpretations.  To make alignment work at all in D&D, you tend to have to go with the latter option.  If you go with the former, you just start making things too difficult on classes that are traditionally oriented along strict alignment lines (even if those alignments are no longer a requirement for the class; looking at you, Paladin...) when they travel.  Alignment requires reliance on an objective morality system.

 

Consequently, actions matter more than beliefs.  Animating corpses ought not to be "evil" in and of itself, even if some personal beliefs color it that way (and in a world of magic, why would it? If one knows the gods exist, which the existence of spellcasting Clerics proves, and one concludes the soul is gone to some afterlife "elsewhere", which high-level planar explorers can likewise prove and have likely documented, the body quickly becomes worthless after someone is dead, and should have no inherent sanctity attached to it; why is it also all right to stuff the departed's soul back into the body to resurrect them, but not to use the body as a tool without a soul inhabiting it?).  It should be a matter of what's being done.

 

Are those animated corpses being used to terrorize the village for financial or other resource gain?  Evil Necromancer.  Are those animated corpses being conscripted as shock troops or fodder in a war-torn area to defend local municipalities from incursion?  Not an evil Necromancer.  Is the Wizard prolonging their life via necromancy to continue research into magic which will make them a god that can rule over their part of the Material Plane?  Evil lich.  Is the Wizard prolonging their life via necromancy to continue a passionate study of magic for its own sake, or to continue defending a village/barony/kingdom they're responsible for?  Not an evil lich.

 

In terms of "pop", I agree with the OP that the Necromancer lacks a lot of it.  There just doesn't seem to be a lot of system support in comparison to an Illusionist or Evoker.  Players are also working against a built-in bias against necromancy, which is unfortunate with a new Dungeon Master, but easily avoidable with a more experienced one.  

#53

Thoughts_My_Aim

Sep 07, 2014 9:43:00

Eldren73 wrote:
#54

daspian

Sep 07, 2014 14:34:37

Honestly, i had the Necromancer theme intended for my character but was so turned off by it's abilities, i went Warlock, used the Fiend or GoO pact and reflavor some of my spells to Necrotic, Poison or Cold damage at DM's discretion to fit with the flavor of the Necromancer. DM also went ahead and said could change the spells you get from Patron to more Necromancer spells,

 

You could also just homebrew a new patron with new effects for a better Necromancer-Lock, or hell Homebrew and "edit" the School of Necromancy for the Wizard, if you feel it really sucks that bad...