Are you satisfied with the state of Necromancy in this edition? Why or why not?

[Coidzor]

And is this as a player or a DM or both?

I've been noticing a tendency towards heavily negative responses to discussing the subject, so I figured I should confirm if this is the case.

[pwykersotz]

I think it's adequate. It's not amazing, it's not abysmal, it's middle of the road. It has a couple potential exploits in mass minions if you're referring to the Wizard subclass, but I'm as happy with it as any other magic type. If I want more lore I dip into earlier editions or alternate sources anyway, but I did the same with 3.5. And I like that Resurrection is thrown into Necromancy now.

[mephnick]

Yeah it's fine. But I'm biased and consider minion builds the worst thing to ever happen to D&D so I'm glad necromancy isn't as powerful as it used to be.

[Rhedyn]

Nope because I can't raise animals or make bone dragons.


Yeah it's fine. But I'm biased and consider minion builds the worst thing to ever happen to D&D so I'm glad necromancy isn't as powerful as it used to be.

Funny you say that, because I can't think of an edition where it is more powerful than this one. Necromancers crush action economy and are walking capable armies. At least in 3.x undead could be out leveled

[MrStabby]

Am I happy with necromancy? Not really. There is too much emphasis on spells like animate dead that promote tedious builds that slow down the game and diminish fun for others.

Outside of that, there are some good spells but also some really underwhelming spells as well. Furthermore there are a number of spell levels for different classes where you can't pick up necromancy spells at all.

[mephnick]

Funny you say that, because I can't think of an edition where it is more powerful than this one. Necromancers crush action economy and are walking capable armies. At least in 3.x undead could be out leveled

Damn really? I just hear people complain the undead are no good. Haven't seen it in play yet.

If that's the case switch me to unhappy. (not that I'd allow an undead minion build anyway)

[Foxhound438]

I think it's a solid side grade to casting conjure animals:

a 5th level wizard, using both L3's and his arcane recovery, can have 9 skeletons running around in any fight, so long as you don't have any of them die ever- that's a CR 2.25 force, but as soon as the first fight of the day occurs, you're probably going to lose some of them.

The druid with conjure animals, on the other hand, can have a CR 2 force pop out at the beginning of 3 separate fights, each time fully refreshed... Heck, he could even pop up a second force in one fight if the first one dies.

Basically, you lose out on power in later encounters, but you gain the ability to just use a different spell while also having minions. At higher levels I think necromancy looks a bit more appealing for the fact that you get a growing, more powerful fighting force with more spell slots at your disposal, but I guess at the same time you're casting create undead twice for 6 little CR1's the druid is casting conjure fey for a singular CR6. Not sure which is better, honestly, but I do think having concentration free minions is slightly better than the one that has more impact.

[MrStabby]

I think it's a solid side grade to casting conjure animals:

a 5th level wizard, using both L3's and his arcane recovery, can have 9 skeletons running around in any fight, so long as you don't have any of them die ever- that's a CR 2.25 force, but as soon as the first fight of the day occurs, you're probably going to lose some of them.

The druid with conjure animals, on the other hand, can have a CR 2 force pop out at the beginning of 3 separate fights, each time fully refreshed... Heck, he could even pop up a second force in one fight if the first one dies.

Basically, you lose out on power in later encounters, but you gain the ability to just use a different spell while also having minions. At higher levels I think necromancy looks a bit more appealing for the fact that you get a growing, more powerful fighting force with more spell slots at your disposal, but I guess at the same time you're casting create undead twice for 6 little CR1's the druid is casting conjure fey for a singular CR6. Not sure which is better, honestly, but I do think having concentration free minions is slightly better than the one that has more impact.

I am not saying skeletons/zombies are overpowered, just that their presence makes the game worse. The same is true for other summoned/conjured creatures as well - not just necromancy spells. How much table time does one player need to accomplish so little?

[User_Undefined]

It's alright? I haven't played a necromancy focused character, so I haven't really dug into it. I do wish all healing spells went back to the Necromancy school though, if for no other reason than I think necromancy should encompass all aspects of life manipulation, both draining it and restoring it.

[Dudu]

I wish animated dead allowed less "army building" and more "animating powerful foes."

Animate Dead scales on number of creatures you can animate. Create Undead allow you to animate guys who can, in turn, create more undead. It can get out of hand.

I'd rather animate a beholder (we even have his stats) using a higher level slot of animate dead then have dozens of boring skeleton eating up table time.

[Hrugner]

I wish animated dead allowed less "army building" and more "animating powerful foes."

Animate Dead scales on number of creatures you can animate. Create Undead allow you to animate guys who can, in turn, create more undead. It can get out of hand.

I'd rather animate a beholder (we even have his stats) using a higher level slot of animate dead then have dozens of boring skeleton eating up table time.

This is my problem with it as well. Gaining more power by adding one more skeleton to your army isn't very fun and it slows the game down. I want to animate the giant we just killed, or a dragon even if it doesn't last forever. Beyond that, I really don't like the first few abilities in the necromancy wizard school the first because it sucks and the second because it supports the army building stuff I don't like. There isn't much to like about necromancy in this version.

[dejarnjc]

I am not saying skeletons/zombies are overpowered, just that their presence makes the game worse. The same is true for other summoned/conjured creatures as well - not just necromancy spells. How much table time does one player need to accomplish so little?

Eh that's really player dependent though I get where you're coming from. I have a high level druid and love(d) using conjure animals throughout his career. On average my turns took about 30 seconds or so (including the animals) because I knew what I was doing and had all the stats in front of me ( <3 the companions app on android) and if i summoned more than 2 at a time I would just automate the rolls via another app.

Anyway enough shameless bragging from me... my point is simply that minionmancy doesn't have to be time consuming and if it is slowing down the game there are several tools that can help.

[SharkForce]

Nope because I can't raise animals or make bone dragons.



Funny you say that, because I can't think of an edition where it is more powerful than this one. Necromancers crush action economy and are walking capable armies. At least in 3.x undead could be out leveled

depending on what sources you allowed, 2nd AD&D could easily get way more out of hand. even with just the PHB, you could control an infinite number of zombies and skeletons. and their hit dice could go as high as the hit dice of whatever corpse you could get your hands on (well, technically zombies could get one hit die beyond even that, but zombies suck).

and since monsters in that edition had their natural attacks count as a magical weapon based on their hit die, high hit die skeletons and zombies could damage anything.

then add in that 2nd edition had a variety of specialized spells for creating undead, many of which *also* gave you permanent control with no need to recast the spell to retain control, and a number of them had special abilities, well... it could get out of hand.

and of course, 3.x had some pretty ridiculous things. like a level 2 spell that could last for a ridiculous amount of time (i want to say 1 day per level) that gave you total control of undead creatures that failed their save. or no save i think, if they were unintelligent. which meant you could get control of a large number of undead regardless of their hit die, CR, special abilities, or anything else.

honestly, in comparison, 5e is pretty tame.

[Foxhound438]

I am not saying skeletons/zombies are overpowered, just that their presence makes the game worse. The same is true for other summoned/conjured creatures as well - not just necromancy spells. How much table time does one player need to accomplish so little?

i feel like there are ways of expediting the extra actions, like moving all at once and directing all attacks at one thing and rolling a pile of dice, it's just that someone will always want to go through with every summon creature to do their actions individually, and won't go fast about it...

[Rhedyn]

i feel like there are ways of expediting the extra actions, like moving all at once and directing all attacks at one thing and rolling a pile of dice, it's just that someone will always want to go through with every summon creature to do their actions individually, and won't go fast about it...

DMG even has "mass vs one" combat rules and monsters can just take average damage. A Necromancer's turn could consist of just the stating damage done.

Running minions vast can be taxing but it's not impossible. Any reasonable player should be able to manage. It helps if the DM works with the player by letting them know things like monster AC so the turn can be calculated during other people's turns.

[Phoenix042]

Minionmancy of any sort beyond the extremely limited features like familiars and the beastmaster animal companion should not be handled by the Player's Handbook and allowed into typical games.

In my opinion, crafting an undead creature should not be like casting a spell; it should be like crafting a magic item. It should be a process that happens during downtime if at all, and only in games where doing it is appropriate. It should not be up to the DM to houserule away necromancy spells if he wants his game to run the way it's supposed to, and it shouldn't really require a lot of character resource investment for a feature that honestly shouldn't be allowed to contribute to any kind of challenge the players face as a party anyways.

Minionmancy slows down combat when you run the minions like extra party members and have their player's roll dice and decide their actions, and streamlining that process would be a pretty big game-design project that really has no place in D&D.

In a game where combat is meant to be between a small group of adventurers and a small group of bad guys, hordes of minions should be plot pieces. A player whose character wanted to be a necromancer and lead armies of undead into battle to forge himself an empire of undeath could be allowed to do this, but his skeletons and zombies would have their activities handled en masse in the background while the real action stayed centered on the party.

[Beelzebubba]

In a game where combat is meant to be between a small group of adventurers and a small group of bad guys

See, that's the problem. The game I've always played had a hell of a lot of variety to the sizes, dispositions, and styles of combat.

It's not 'meant' to be that. You want that. That's fine. But there's way more than one kind of story to tell here.

[SharkForce]

See, that's the problem. The game I've always played had a hell of a lot of variety to the sizes, dispositions, and styles of combat.

It's not 'meant' to be that. You want that. That's fine. But there's way more than one kind of story to tell here.

my understanding is that back in the day your party probably had up to 30 people in it (a few PCs and then a bunch of hirelings on top of that). i suppose that is small in comparison to an army, but certainly not what we would think of as small in modern gaming :P

[Beelzebubba]

my understanding is that back in the day your party probably had up to 30 people in it (a few PCs and then a bunch of hirelings on top of that). i suppose that is small in comparison to an army, but certainly not what we would think of as small in modern gaming :P

Eh, more like 10-15. But (old man shaky voice) you've got the right idea, Sonny. :smallbiggrin:

I think treating those groups differently than characters - with simpler mechanics - is perfectly fine. Making them share initiative, rolling to hit for several of them at one time, with handfuls of dice worked out fine. It just requires a little table discipline.

[Foxymew]

I think it's perfectly all right, really. I run a necromancer at level 9 now, I believe, and basically just have 4 skeletons with crossbows following me around at all time. 4 1d10+6 with +4 to hit per turn is quite nice. High agility means a decent chance to survive at least one AOE, but otherwise have very little HP, but decent enough AC with upgraded armor.

That's how I run it at least, takes one of my L3 slots, takes me an hour to get them back if they die, but I have a bag of holding that I stuff them into, and just save it for downtime or otherwise when I can get to it. They're just nice damage addition. And really don't take that much time for the round, I basically go "Four crossbow on this bad guy" or spread it out if i think they're close to death, and then throw dice accordingly.

I'm sure I would have more damage if I went evocation wizzard or something, but I wanted something interesting fluffwise, so an old guy dying of old age pursuing the key to immortality through necromancy is nice fluff to me. Aracogras don't live too long.

[Unoriginal]

I like that Undead that were previously just mindless puppets like zombies or skeletons actually have a mind (even if a pretty limited one) and a will, this edition. Every single mook you animate will want to kill you and everything that is alive, because they're omnicidal spirits put into bodies.

[Slayn82]

I like that Undead that were previously just mindless puppets like zombies or skeletons actually have a mind (even if a pretty limited one) and a will, this edition. Every single mook you animate will want to kill you and everything that is alive, because they're omnicidal spirits put into bodies.

Undead always wanted to kill all the living things if left uncontrolled. But I agree, it's nice that they now have some trace of awareness. It means you can possibly teach them how to use items or traps!

Even uncontrolled undead can fill a dungeon and learn where is the trapdoor in the corridor that will withstand their weight, but will drop a living medium creature. Or where the poison gas trap switch is.

[Unoriginal]

Undead always wanted to kill all the living things if left uncontrolled.

Well, in 3.X at least the unintelligent Undead really had no Int, so no capacity to want anything.

In 5e, they're actively and knowlingly malevolent, and I like that.




Even uncontrolled undead can fill a dungeon and learn where is the trapdoor in the corridor that will withstand their weight, but will drop a living medium creature. Or where the poison gas trap switch is.

Oh, most of them would be too dumb to figure out how to open a closed door, but they could certainly figure out which part of the dungeon are dangerous for living beings and not for them.

Now I kinda want to make an encounter that is a bunch of Undead at the end of a trap-filled corridor, with the PCs on the other side, with the undead baiting them to charge recklessly.

[Sception]

For core, it's alright. Not great, but passable, considering it's a difficult mechanical gimmick to get right, and also off theme for typical PC adventurers. As it is, the daily upkeep mechanics and upcasting for stronger/more undead built into animate dead and create undead are pretty solid, imo, as is the balance of weaker but cheaper, longer lasting, and non-concentration undead minions vs the stronger but shorter and often concentration based summoned monsters.

But for going on three years, with little to no expansion of the theme in unearthed arcana or otherwise? No. There are several glaring gaps that really should have been filled by now. The most notable being:


1) Expansion of the range of undead you can create, in particular non-standard skeletons and zombies such as skeletal horses and zombie ogres. This could so easily be resolved with a UA article including an up-casting table for animate dead similar to that already existing for command undead covering some of the non-standard skeletons and zombies in the monster manual, along with introducing a few new ones. Skeletal Steeds at the very least shouldn't require DM improvisation.

2) Necromancy themed subclasses for classes other than wizard. Oathbreaker works well enough for paladin, but Death domain does nothing of the sort for cleric, and I'm still waiting on undead-using subclasses for other classes. Where's my dirgesinger bard, vampire bloodline sorcerer, or dead god patron / shadowcaster boon warlock?

3) Spells that enhance undead you control. like, minute duration, concentration-using necromancy spells that buff all or some of the undead under your control, or just friendly undead in general

4) ways to play an undead character. the 5e Revenant was extremely specific and not terribly user friendly. How about some undead races - necropolitan, or vryloka perhap? Or some transformational prestige classes? Vampire or Lich characters, for instance, are difficult concepts to translate into races, subclasses, or even entire classes on their own, but would be remarkably easy to implement as PrCs.

[Unoriginal]

4) ways to play an undead character. the 5e Revenant was extremely specific and not terribly user friendly. How about some undead races - necropolitan, or vryloka perhap? Or some transformational prestige classes? Vampire or Lich characters, for instance, are difficult concepts to translate into races, subclasses, or even entire classes on their own, but would be remarkably easy to implement as PrCs.

I think that's pretty intentional they didn't do that. The way Undead are described in 5e is mostly "can't play that"

[LudicSavant]

I have a number of bones to pick with the state of necromancy in 5e. Here are a few:

1) Though things like Revivify are properly of the necromancy school now, Cure Wounds still isn't.
2) You can only animate generic humanoid skeletons. This seems like a big loss for flavor and NPC/PC transparency.
3) Minionmancy is a mechanical mess in 5e, whether we're talking about Conjure Animals or Animate Dead. One of the (many) issues with it is that it encourages hordes, rather than summoning one bigger creature. This is problematic both in terms of playability (slowing down the game) and in terms of balance (bounded accuracy archery lines or pixie swarms and the like).
4) The archetypes associated with it are disappointing. The Necromancer wizard what... heals a bit for grabbing last hits with direct damage necromancy spells? Ugh. And the Death Domain is squirreled away in the DMG and "not designed for PCs," and given the implication that it's eeeevil even though there are examples of non-evil gods offering the death domain in both the PHB and D&D lore at large.

[Ninja_Prawn]

There are several glaring gaps that really should have been filled by now. The most notable being:

1) Expansion of the range of undead you can create, in particular non-standard skeletons and zombies such as skeletal horses and zombie ogres. This could so easily be resolved with a UA article including an up-casting table for animate dead similar to that already existing for command undead covering some of the non-standard skeletons and zombies in the monster manual, along with introducing a few new ones. Skeletal Steeds at the very least shouldn't require DM improvisation.

2) Necromancy themed subclasses for classes other than wizard. Oathbreaker works well enough for paladin, but Death domain does nothing of the sort for cleric, and I'm still waiting on undead-using subclasses for other classes. Where's my dirgesinger bard, vampire bloodline sorcerer, or dead god patron / shadowcaster boon warlock?

3) Spells that enhance undead you control. like, minute duration, concentration-using necromancy spells that buff all or some of the undead under your control, or just friendly undead in general

4) ways to play an undead character. the 5e Revenant was extremely specific and not terribly user friendly. How about some undead races - necropolitan, or vryloka perhap? Or some transformational prestige classes? Vampire or Lich characters, for instance, are difficult concepts to translate into races, subclasses, or even entire classes on their own, but would be remarkably easy to implement as PrCs.

I have some homebrew that could help with this!

1. On the smaller end of the scale, Lesser Animate Dead and Animate Body Part in here (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/02/necromancy-spells.html) expand the range of things you can animate. I also made a template (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20551063&postcount=2) for turning beasts into skeletons and zombies, though I believe there is an official one somewhere as well. Oh, and I made stats for undead kobolds (https://www.dropbox.com/s/1u0jm3ysj495hky/Kobolds.pdf?dl=0), too!

2. My colleagues have written a sorcerous origin (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2016/06/pale-master.html) and a roguish archetype (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2016/09/dhampir-assassin.html). They also made a dirge singer (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2015/09/dirge-singer_19.html) bard, but it's one of their older ones and I'm not sold on the balance of it.

3. My rendition of Undead Lieutenant is in the set of spells I linked for point 1. I have also written a couple of less-serious spells: Augment Undead at the end of this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20460430&postcount=3), Unholy Summoning in here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21124166&postcount=185) and Danse Macabre here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21172887&postcount=190).

4. Got a couple of races from the MFoV guys: dhampyr (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/01/dhampyr.html) and revenant (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2016/02/revenant.html), plus my cold rider and soul-o'-wisp in here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/s3crmpfdbc5u5x5/Fey%20Creatures%20Complete.pdf?dl=0). Then there are my epic lichdom rules (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2016/12/epic-boons-path-to-lichdom.html) and a vampiric prestige class (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20767211&postcount=12) for non-racial undeath.

Enjoy!

[mephnick]

Summoning one big undead is problematic too. Now your wizard/cleric has a strong pet they can control. I feel that kind of stuff should only be achieved through class features. Find Familiar is already bad enough at stealing class features for a single spell slot. Honestly conjuring good stuff is almost always unbalanced because it adds a role to full casters (meatshield) they should never have.

[Unoriginal]

Summoning one big undead is problematic too. Now your wizard/cleric has a strong pet they can control. I feel that kind of stuff should only be achieved through class features. Find Familiar is already bad enough at stealing class features for a single spell slot. Honestly conjuring good stuff is almost always unbalanced because it adds a role to full casters (meatshield) they should never have.

If I had to make rules to summon a big undead, I'd make it so that the undead get a roll to escape the caster regularly.

Maybe the Undead getting a roll each time time the caster get wounded would be overkill, but it seems like something like that would be needed.

OR: making it so that controlling the big Undead require Concentration.

[Asmotherion]

As a DM I am satisfyed, mechanics wise, but not lore/option wise. I like uncorporeal undead more than corporeal ones (with the exception of the Lich), and there are no spell options for summoning someone's ghost (for example), or controlling a wraith. It's just Zobies, Skeletons (Aka zombie cores), Slightly smarter Zobies (aka ghouls), Significantly smarter Zobies (ghasts), Ancient Egyptian dehydrated glorified Zobies (Mummies not including Mummy Lord). Literally no entry for ghosts or wraiths or specters... Both as a DM and as a player, I like using the "I control a thousand spirits" approach either on a PC or BBEG or just NPC. Now, as a DM I can still do it, but for a PC, the only valid option is true polymorph, and it's transmutation school, not necromancy... O_O



If I had to make rules to summon a big undead, I'd make it so that the undead get a roll to escape the caster regularly.

Maybe the Undead getting a roll each time time the caster get wounded would be overkill, but it seems like something like that would be needed.

OR: making it so that controlling the big Undead require Concentration.

Now, I gotta disagree with that. A full caster using a powerfull undead is using one or more of his highest spell slots. This means he won't have that spell slot during adventuring, as he has to reserve it for the undead or loose control. Also the fact that the undead will start attacking the party should the spellcaster die is enough of a backlash in using undead. If it reqired concentration, nobody would pick Necromancy as a school.

[Unoriginal]

Now, I gotta disagree with that. A full caster using a powerfull undead is using one or more of his highest spell slots. This means he won't have that spell slot during adventuring, as he has to reserve it for the undead or loose control. Also the fact that the undead will start attacking the party should the spellcaster die is enough of a backlash in using undead. If it reqired concentration, nobody would pick Necromancy as a school.[/FONT]

How about a Concentration check if you are wounded, or if you reach 0 HP?

[LudicSavant]

because it adds a role to full casters (meatshield) they should never have.

It doesn't add that role, because full casters in 5e already had it, whether it's moon druids, arcana clerics, abjurer wizards, whatever.

[Phoenix042]

See, that's the problem. The game I've always played had a hell of a lot of variety to the sizes, dispositions, and styles of combat.

It's not 'meant' to be that. You want that. That's fine. But there's way more than one kind of story to tell here.

You misunderstand me. In my games, encounters often run the gamut of sizes, including some 1 v 1 duels and some 10,000 v 10,000 full-scale battles.

Thing is, when I run those big battles, I don't roll an attack roll for each of 20,000 participants each round. The players handbook does not have rules supporting that level of combat, and leaves it to the DM to adjudicate. The DMG has helpful advice, and there's an UA article that has even more rules for mass combat if you need them.

But the point is, at some point you pass the number of creatures that it is fun to roll for and act out individually each round. In my opinion, that number is much lower than the numbers that decent necromancy rules should provide; it ought to be possible for a PC to create his own massive armies of undead at some point if the player and DM both agree that that would be fun. Not tens of minions, but tens of thousands. After all, there's no reason that a PC couldn't rouse a nation to his cause and lead an army of conscripts and soldiers into battle if the story leads there. But that doesn't mean that the "leadership" feat wasn't a stupid idea in 3.5.

I'm just saying that giving players these tools directly in the players handbook limits what they can do, way too much, because the only rules you have that officially handle those zombies and skeletons actions are the same rules being used to handle the PCs actions each round, and that's messy.

You obviously agree with me there, as you mention in a later post that your group uses houserules to handle combat with lots of minions. That's fine, but you should acknowledge that if you have to resort to using DMG advice and houseruling to handle problems created in the Player's Handbook, then obviously there's a problem to handle in the first place.

Idk, this just seems like it calls for more in-depth rules, and I don't feel like they belong in the PHB.

[Rhedyn]

3) Minionmancy is a mechanical mess in 5e, whether we're talking about Conjure Animals or Animate Dead. One of the (many) issues with it is that it encourages hordes, rather than summoning one bigger creature. This is problematic both in terms of playability (slowing down the game) and in terms of balance (bounded accuracy archery lines or pixie swarms and the like).


This is a general problem with 5e. Numbers > anything else. My PCs are more scared of 50+ orcs than dragons, demon lords, or even Gods.

Idk why PC levels exist after level 9, by then you should amass enough wealth that you can field an army to solve any and all problems that you may run into.

[rigolgm]

Necromancers in 5th edition initially look fun, but could become massively irritating as the level-up. Highest-level necromancers can have wayyyy more than 100 upgraded skeletons soldiers (with bows, seemingly) with them constantly. They can easily kill ancient dragons etc - or not, depending massively on how much the DM limits their usefulness. Certain illusion spells can even disguise a lot of them as regular people at first glance. I believe necromancers can exploit the spell that lowers enemy INT to potentially enslave a Liche or similar as a long-term pet.

So it all boils down to things like:
- Does the player want to play a potentially one-dimensional character?
- Are the players/DM happy that the necromacer is potentially so overpowered and when 95% of combat actions are from the necromancer and his/her minions?
- How heavily will the DM house-rule on questions such as whether summoned undead come fully equipped and whether it is impossible to travel or practically fight using such armies?

It all adds up to a minefield of gameplay problems - and probably not the fun kind.

[Sception]

I think that's pretty intentional they didn't do that. The way Undead are described in 5e is mostly "can't play that"

Which is an example of how I'm content with necromancy's depiction in the core, but not in it's coverage in expansion material. It's a non-standard thing, to be sure, and really doesn't belong in the core books much as I would have liked to see it, BUT there is no reason not to have provided it in some sort of optional expansion for non-standard games now that we're three years down the line.

[DragonSorcererX]

And is this as a player or a DM or both?

I've been noticing a tendency towards heavily negative responses to discussing the subject, so I figured I should confirm if this is the case.

As a player I think it would be powerful enough for an evil character to use it.

As a DM, wathever, just follow the WotC way and say that monsters/npcs follow wathever rules you need them to follow (Yes, I'm looking at you Thay Necromancer from LMoP).

[LordCdrMilitant]

No, as a player and GM.

I don't like the whole "goes free after 24 hours unless you spend your spell slot to re-assert control". It doesn't make me feel like I have a legion of the damned at my disposal, at the very least, and means I have to commit a fair chunk of the my character's resources to maintain a piddling number of really crappy things-that-take-turns-and-time-to-control-but-won't-ever-contribute.

Also, the necromancy wizard path feels only half focused on having an army of disposable minions, the other half on dealing damage.


I feel like there's a lot of potential for necromancy that's lost in 5e. As I mentioned in another thread, a noble wizard could use skeletons to work the fields of the estate, or as standing sentries at the property, or as servants. There's also the classic amassing of a massive army. I used skeletons in PF to crew a space fortress.

I think the raised ones should at least be permanent with no further spell investment, with a level-based limit on maximum controlled.

[Sception]

massive armies of skeletons belong in a mass battles expansion, alongside hiring and leading armies of regular soldiers. As with many aspects of necromancy, it really isn't something that belongs in core games since it isn't appropriate to the default adventuring-party campaign, but is something that should exist in expansion material for those off-beat games where it is appropriate.

In core adventuring, I actually very much like the upkeep mechanic on animate dead and create undead. Because undead are a persistent benefit, there needs to be some sort of ongoing cost to using undead, and i prefer spell upkeep to expensive material components. And as for the strength of the undead servants themselves, given that you can have multiples of them, that they don't take concentration, and expend only a single bonus action per encounter from their controller, i really don't think they can be any stronger than they already are. If anything, they're a bit strong for the investment already at anything but the highest spell levels.

Then again, that's one of the reasons I'd like to see necromantic buff spells to enhance your undead, albeit at the cost of further spell slots, limited duration, and concentration expenditure.

[Camman1984]

One problem I see with wizards losing control of their minions is that literally every single wizard I have ever come across is roleplayed with and arrogance and contempt for the lives of the party.

-rogue accidently uses wizards toothbrush
-wizard readies power word kill

I feel that any drawback that does not directly impact the wizard is no drawback at all.

[JackOfAllBuilds]

If a player kills a humanoid enemy of a specific race, say an orc, and then wants to Animate the corpse, do you apply the orc racial bonuses (DMG 282, npc features table) or do you apply the zombie stats (same table) to the orc npc?

[Ninja_Prawn]

If a player kills a humanoid enemy of a specific race, say an orc, and then wants to Animate the corpse, do you apply the orc racial bonuses (DMG 282, npc features table) or do you apply the zombie stats (same table) to the orc npc?

All zombies are created equal!

http://zombierightscampaign.org/images/nocs/protesters.jpg

[JackOfAllBuilds]

All zombies are created equal!

http://zombierightscampaign.org/images/nocs/protesters.jpg

I just get bored with cookie-cutter identical zombies. Can't we have some with racial flavor?

[Coidzor]

If a player kills a humanoid enemy of a specific race, say an orc, and then wants to Animate the corpse, do you apply the orc racial bonuses (DMG 282, npc features table) or do you apply the zombie stats (same table) to the orc npc?

Unless you're using homebrew, all humanoids have identical stats when converted into undead whether they're skeletons or zombies or ghouls or ghasts or wights or mummies or mummy lords.

The only exceptions are Vampires and Liches, as I recall. Can't remember if all Vampire Spawn are identical offhand.

That's something that I was interested in seeing if everyone liked it being that way or if they would prefer it to be otherwise or what when I made the thread. Along with whether everyone really was happy with only being able to make undead out of humanoids, since I'd received a fair amount of **** just for asking if anyone had come up with or used any rules for making non-humanoid undead.

[JackOfAllBuilds]

Unless you're using homebrew, all humanoids have identical stats when converted into undead whether they're skeletons or zombies or ghouls or ghasts or wights or mummies or mummy lords.

The only exceptions are Vampires and Liches, as I recall. Can't remember if all Vampire Spawn are identical offhand.

That's something that I was interested in seeing if everyone liked it being that way or if they would prefer it to be otherwise or what when I made the thread. Along with whether everyone really was happy with only being able to make undead out of humanoids, since I'd received a fair amount of **** just for asking if anyone had come up with or used any rules for making non-humanoid undead.

So if I make a gnome or halfling zombie, they're suddenly medium creatures?

[Coidzor]

So if I make a gnome or halfling zombie, they're suddenly medium creatures?

That seems to be the case, aye. Or maybe the only difference is that they're small-sized.

[Unoriginal]

If a player kills a humanoid enemy of a specific race, say an orc, and then wants to Animate the corpse, do you apply the orc racial bonuses (DMG 282, npc features table) or do you apply the zombie stats (same table) to the orc npc?



I just get bored with cookie-cutter identical zombies. Can't we have some with racial flavor?



So if I make a gnome or halfling zombie, they're suddenly medium creatures?

Given the Zombie Ogre conserves its STR and Large size, I'd say that the size doesn't change and the physical stats only change if it gives them an improvement.

Like, make a zombie from a STR 6 person, and they'd get their STR becoming the one of the basic zombie. Use the body of a hero with STR 20, and the zombie keeps STR 20.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Like, make a zombie from a STR 6 person, and they'd get their STR becoming the one of the basic zombie. Use the body of a hero with STR 20, and the zombie keeps STR 20.

That makes it a bloody nightmare for the DM though, because you can't possibly prepare stat blocks for every different person that might get zombified, which means you have to figure out the CRs and stuff on the fly, possibly in the middle of combat. Ain't no one got time for that. It's like... if the DM were a video game, having unique zombies would murder your frame rate.

I like the idea of unique zombies, but feel that some amount of standardisation is necessary in order to make the game playable. If I know in advance which zombies I'll need, sure, I'll stat them up individually ('generic small humanoid' seems like one that would be worth doing as soon as a player says the word 'necromancer', for example). But if you suddenly decide to raise a load of zombies out of nowhere, I'm afraid you're getting the cookie-cutter ones.

[2D8HP]

Except for briefly playng a high elf rogue that used the Firebolt Cantrip, I just don't play any Spell-casters, so no I haven't noticed a difference.

[Coidzor]

That makes it a bloody nightmare for the DM though, because you can't possibly prepare stat blocks for every different person that might get zombified, which means you have to figure out the CRs and stuff on the fly, possibly in the middle of combat. Ain't no one got time for that. It's like... if the DM were a video game, having unique zombies would murder your frame rate.

I like the idea of unique zombies, but feel that some amount of standardisation is necessary in order to make the game playable. If I know in advance which zombies I'll need, sure, I'll stat them up individually ('generic small humanoid' seems like one that would be worth doing as soon as a player says the word 'necromancer', for example). But if you suddenly decide to raise a load of zombies out of nowhere, I'm afraid you're getting the cookie-cutter ones.

Hmm? Wouldn't the fact that vast majority of NPCs are going to have pre-determined ability scores based upon their racial modifiers and the array for whether they're Commoners or Guards or Veterans or what have you would limit actual generated stats to named NPCs?

You don't need to generate individual stats for 20 Guards or Veterans, but it'd be simple enough math to apply the racials for whether they're Human or Mountain Dwarf or Half-Orc before slapping on a template to make the undead version.

But if one is going graverobbing into the tomb of a hero specifically for the purpose, then, yeah, something above the standard would be the expected reward unless things switched tracks.

[JackOfAllBuilds]

THIS is what I was talking about, since you all seem to be missing the point

https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0366/85/1418260802344.png

If you raise an orc or gnome npc as a zombie: add racial to zombie monster block, or zombie stats to npc monster block?

[Coidzor]

THIS is what I was talking about, since you all seem to be missing the point

https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0366/85/1418260802344.png

If you raise an orc or gnome npc as a zombie: add racial to zombie monster block, or zombie stats to npc monster block?

Conventional wisdom, as far as I understand it, is that if you cast Animate Dead, then you get a Skeleton or Zombie monster block, with no modification from the base creature's race or its ability scores for having been a Commoner or Guard or Archdruid or Champion, etc.

If you could modify more powerful NPCs into Skeleton or Zombie minions that retain their higher HD, HP, proficiency bonus, and special attacks, Animate Dead would certainly be more powerful.



Making a Zombie Guard or the like is entirely DM territory, with no mechanism by which a player can interact with it, so the DM could choose to include the bonuses for both being a Dwarf and a Zombie for a Dwarven Zombie Champion, but a player whose character casts Animate Dead just doesn't have that option without houserules and homebrew.

[Lonely Tylenol]

All zombies are created equal!

http://zombierightscampaign.org/images/nocs/protesters.jpg

#UnLivesMatter

I'm generally OK with the necromancy provided in this edition. I would have liked to see some rules for upscaling (higher level spell slot = higher CR skeletons/zombies) and possibly using templated undead using the NPC templates for skeleton and zombie in the DMG. Even lateral moves in this regard (creating different CR 1/4 beasts as skeletons or zombies as a 3rd-level spell) would have been nice.

It doesn't matter *too* much for me, since I DM and can just use the DM's tools for this, but it would be nice to have, say, undead hounds, or an undead gryphon at later levels, and so on.

[Slayn82]

I would have liked to see some rules for upscaling (higher level spell slot = higher CR skeletons/zombies) and possibly using templated undead using the NPC templates for skeleton and zombie in the DMG. Even lateral moves in this regard (creating different CR 1/4 beasts as skeletons or zombies as a 3rd-level spell) would have been nice.

I don't think it would be overpowered if a spell cast in a level 5-6 slot created a single zombie with more power, by applying the Zombie modifiers to a creature, letting it keep base HD and proficiency bonuses. Maybe requiring 1 spell level per 2 HD of the base creature? Contrast with Gaeas and Summon Elementals.

And having the creature lose spell cast, regeneration. Just keeping the stats, but losing non physical special abilities.

[Flashy]

I don't think it would be overpowered if a spell cast in a level 5-6 slot created a single zombie with more power, by applying the Zombie modifiers to a creature, letting it keep base HD and proficiency bonuses. Maybe requiring 1 spell level per 2 HD of the base creature? Contrast with Gaeas and Summon Elementals.

And having the creature lose spell cast, regeneration. Just keeping the stats, but losing non physical special abilities.

Hit die don't really mean anything for monsters this edition though. They're an arbitrary ways to assign hit points. You'd have to tie it directly to CR, which would require fiddle calculations since you're then adding features which have an impact on CR.

[skaddix]

Its fine the Necromancy should be restricted so someone cant build a super army.

Unless its solo campaign or one where that PC or their team leads actual Armies.

Allowing Necromancers to build massive armies can easily trivialize most challenges.
Or even worse greatly annoy your teammates who don't get to do anything because your army is doing all the work.

[Coidzor]

Its fine the Necromancy should be restricted so someone cant build a super army.

Unless its solo campaign or one where that PC or their team leads actual Armies.

Allowing Necromancers to build massive armies can easily trivialize most challenges.
Or even worse greatly annoy your teammates who don't get to do anything because your army is doing all the work.

Necromancy can't build a full-sized 1000+ man strong army(until you get Finger of Death), but the way it's set up in 5e is that if one is raising undead, one is raising lots of weaker undead(squads of at least 4 per spell slot devoted to it) and the stronger undead such as Wights and Mummy Lords that one can control at high level are also raising a number of weaker undead.

If you don't want armies, then 5e's rules are definitely not what is leading to a lack of armies in your games, it is either player restraint or a lack of humanoid corpses available to them.

[DeathEatsCurry]

Am I happy with necromancy? Not really. There is too much emphasis on spells like animate dead that promote tedious builds that slow down the game and diminish fun for others.

That depends entirely on your player. Some players think quick, and don't slow the game down any more than any other player. Using multiple D20s at once for all your minion attacks, and calling your scores from lowest to highest to determine from which D20s you start hitting, helps a ton to speed up necromancer gameplay. I played an AL necromancer with a contingent of around 6 archer skeletons for half a year, and I was easily the quickest player in my group. Thinking during other people's turns helps a ton. The guy playing the Barbarian was the one who slowed the game down, simply by being a slow player.

I do understand your point, minion heavy builds (necro or otherwise) should only ever be played by players who understand they have a responsibility to think quick and not slow the game down. But it can easily be done. You can say what you want, but there's something very fun and engaging about zooming your miniature army across the field and feel like a tactical badass.

Edit: That being said, I'm not happy with necromancy in this edition. Minions don't scale very well, and come with a lot of logistical issue (a portable hole is almost an item tax). I'd like it a lot more if the slots were just *reserved* until I unsummoned my undead doods, having to constantly recast the spell gets pretty stupid. Then again, I grew up on Guild Wars' minionmancy, which was amazingly fun and the kind of stuff I'd like to see in DnD. It'd also alleviate some of the moral issues.

[Camman1984]

I am currently running a campaign and have a player who is constantly looking for the latest exploit. I can usually predict what his next question about a new ability for his character will be by reading the powerbuild abuse threads on here haha.

he is also quite a slow player and spends a lot of time with his head in his phone looking for ways to abuse his powers.

... he now has unread minions, I am not worried about them breaking the game and have warned him that the campaign features much more powerful unread friendly casters so hanging round with his undead mates may prove dangerous lol.

My main concern is going to be his time taken running them. I have decided to play it that he gives them an order in his turn and I decide what they do, I will have then act to follow the spirit of his order so no ******* him over, but it prevents him agonising over there positioning and order of attack to try and squeeze every bit of power out. how would this solution go down at your table?

[DeathEatsCurry]

I am currently running a campaign and have a player who is constantly looking for the latest exploit. I can usually predict what his next question about a new ability for his character will be by reading the powerbuild abuse threads on here haha.

he is also quite a slow player and spends a lot of time with his head in his phone looking for ways to abuse his powers.

... he now has unread minions, I am not worried about them breaking the game and have warned him that the campaign features much more powerful unread friendly casters so hanging round with his undead mates may prove dangerous lol.

My main concern is going to be his time taken running them. I have decided to play it that he gives them an order in his turn and I decide what they do, I will have then act to follow the spirit of his order so no ******* him over, but it prevents him agonising over there positioning and order of attack to try and squeeze every bit of power out. how would this solution go down at your table?

Mine? Well, my houserule is to not allow players to bring builds they don't understand without (too much) notes, or builds that are too mentally taxing for them to play at a normal pace. Sooo.. It wouldn't fly at my table. Still, there are some ways to speed it up.

Encourage the player to think during other people's turns. Tell him to give specific orders. Undead listen exceedingly well, but have very little ability to improvise. Some examples.

"Attack!" - They will most likely attack whatever's nearest if melee, or whatever's closest to you if ranged.
"Attack X!" - Usually accompanied by a pointing or mental signal (undead do communicate in part through your magic IIRC). Minions focus fire their targets, if possible. Otherwise, they move in ways that allow them to attack that targets.
"Attack all the red goblins that look like spellcasters!" - "... Err.. Wut, boss?" They will probably attack the closest approximation. Or they'll just idle. That'd be a good way to teach your player to be specific. Heck, you have to clear with your orders with human, live soldiers, let alone things that are only one step above inanimate objects.
"Help X!" - All melee-capable minions perform a Help action if able for X ally. All ranged minions instead just focus fire whatever threatens X ally, since you can't Help at range. Alternatively, ranged minions don't do ****, depending on the owner's tactical acumen (see below).
"Protect X!" - Group hug time!

Generally speaking, orders should be universal, applying to a group of undead. This could be his entire army, a subgroup or even just one. Just keep in mind he should only get one order, so he can't really micro his minions one by one anyways.

As for positioning and their general tactical acumen.. That depends. You could just play them like dumb undead. I'd personally have your minions mimic their master. If the guy is a tactical idiot, his minions are tactical idiots and misposition, block, allow openings, etc. If the guy shows he's tactically smart, his minions follow suit. To me that makes sense, because his minions are an extension of his will. It's kind of like how dogs mirror their owners, if that makes sense. Still, if that's too much effort (no judging), play them as dumb as you want. It's your table, and the guy should learn that.

Furthermore, let him roll all his D20s and all his damage at once. Also insist his minions have as much uniformity in their equipment as possible. Rolling goes a lot faster if it doesn't matter what D20 belongs to what minion, because they all share the same damage die. It also helps him cut down on things he needs to check if, say, one of his minions gets attacked. I personally stick to skeletons with bows and zombies with d8 weapons and some semblance of armor. Two stat blocks for any size army.

If it doesn't matter what D20 is used, you can also apply my other trick. Let him roll them all at once, and then only ask if X hits starting at the lowest die. Example: Suppose my archers roll the following; 7, 10, 11, 15, 16, 22 after modifiers. 7 doesn't hit, die discarded. 10 doesn't hit, die discarded. 11 hits, ergo all the other hit (BECAUSE MATH). That's 4 hits. Proceed to roll 4d8 damage + 4*modifiers. If you start rolling every single skeleton seperately, it really slows the game down. If X number of skeletons have advantage, you just roll those X skeletons in a different area, to allow the reroll.

Out of combat, think about how NPCs react. I, personally, don't think undead are naturally evil or morally wrong. But when I roleplay Bob, the inkeeper of the Mended Trumpet, you can be damn sure he is not gonna be okay with a bunch of evil zombies in his tavern! Minion armies generally don't do well in urban environments, and generally make the owner seem untrustworthy. Use these facts as necessary. A big army can trivialize a lot, but having your big army trivialize these things within sight of NPCs could create problems greater than the problems they trivialized.

Get yourself a chess clock or an hourglass or something if it gets really bad. At the end of the day, players should never hold up the game unnecessarily. If they can't understand that they're not alone in a group, having something limiting the time they take might just be necessary. Each player (at my table) isn't just responsibly for their own ****, but for the enjoyment of everyone at the table. This includes not holding up combat.

Hope that helps!

[Rhedyn]

I am currently running a campaign and have a player who is constantly looking for the latest exploit. I can usually predict what his next question about a new ability for his character will be by reading the powerbuild abuse threads on here haha.

he is also quite a slow player and spends a lot of time with his head in his phone looking for ways to abuse his powers.

... he now has unread minions, I am not worried about them breaking the game and have warned him that the campaign features much more powerful unread friendly casters so hanging round with his undead mates may prove dangerous lol.

My main concern is going to be his time taken running them. I have decided to play it that he gives them an order in his turn and I decide what they do, I will have then act to follow the spirit of his order so no ******* him over, but it prevents him agonising over there positioning and order of attack to try and squeeze every bit of power out. how would this solution go down at your table? his turn just ends after x amount of time.

I would provide resources and help him run faster, but if he is show then his minions just won't do anything.

But I do that to anyone being slow, not just minionmancers.

[Coidzor]

Edit: That being said, I'm not happy with necromancy in this edition. Minions don't scale very well, and come with a lot of logistical issue (a portable hole is almost an item tax). I'd like it a lot more if the slots were just *reserved* until I unsummoned my undead doods, having to constantly recast the spell gets pretty stupid. Then again, I grew up on Guild Wars' minionmancy, which was amazingly fun and the kind of stuff I'd like to see in DnD. It'd also alleviate some of the moral issues.

Guild Wars style? What was that like?

[DeathEatsCurry]

Guild Wars style? What was that like?

Guild Wars is a videogame that launched in 2005. It was one of my first real fantasy experiences, so it left a big mark on me. One of the classes, aptly called the Necromancer, could summon undead minions from corpses. What makes the GW Necromancer so interesting to me compared to most other interpretations is that they're not inherently evil and neither is the magic they use. It is dark and corrupting magic, and it requires a lot of discipline to use, but it can be used for good just as much as holy magic and all that typical goody two shoes stuff. The minions weren't your typical raised zombies or skeletons, but new creatures crafted from the flesh and bone of the corpse. You had a couple of options, each requiring a specific spells, ranging from a jagged bony minions that bled the enemy, ranged minions that shot bony quills, standard meatshields, etc. and could only have a certain amount limited by the relevant spellcasting stat. They also had a very limited lifespan, via a constantly increasing health degeneration.

I'd really like to see this kind of minionmancy translated to DnD (and have considered homebrewing it), because it's far more morally ambivalent than directly animating corpses, and is easier to balance by just giving them proper statblocks with appropriate scaling, and either a duration or that same increasing health degen. By now it should be obvious I really enjoy the idea of the minion using Necromancer, and the way they handled it in Guild Wars is no small part of that. Heck, that game in general remains on of my favorite fantasy properties in general.

[Steampunkette]

I would have preferred to see Undead Control as a form of battlefield control.

Instead of giving the caster an army of possible attack actions, they should've let Necromancers put zombies and skeletons in specific squares to harry enemies. Blocking off areas with zombies that can make reaction opportunity attacks, spirits that don't block a space but instead grant disadvantage or have HP draining auras, skeletal archers that function like Control Weather in that you choose one square that they all shoot at once per round...

It would've been -different-.

[Coidzor]

Those both seem like potentially fertile grounds for homebrew, certainly.

I think that 4e power (whose name I think was Field of Bones now), might have been an idea in that vein. Kelgore's Grave Mist seems like it could be updated, and repurposed from 3.5 for that sorta thing, too, either as one of those auras put out in smaller areas by a number of wraith apparitions or reskinned as the basis for another sort of effect.