Necromancy and Minionmancy before level 5

[Segev]

Necromancers in 5e have a fairly nice boost to the effectiveness of their undead at level 6. Their level 14 subclass capstone is also pretty nice, giving them the only Command Undead effect in the game.

However, Warlocks, Barbarian, Fighter...most classes, really, "come online" by level 3 at the latest. Wizard subclasses...are a mixed bag. Abjurer, Evoker, Conjuror, and Diviner get good, flavorful abilities that make them feel like their namesake expert early. Level 2. Illusionist and Necromancer...get things that barely fit. Necromancer's is particularly bad. "Gain extra hp when you kill a thing with a specific subset of spells."

It neither helps the necromancer kill things, manipulate the dead, nor anything else...except tank. Which he's hardly designed for. (Makes him a good dip for a gish, though.)

Now, I know I'm kind-of in the minority here, but to me, the iconic necromancer is the lord of the undead. But you can't even have one undead minion before level 5. Level 6 to actually be better at it than any other wizard.

At least in 3e, the spell command undead let a base, core-book wizard (Necromancer or not) get ahold of some skeletal or zombie minions. Or make friends with smarter undead. In 5e, there's nothing like that.

At least, not that I can think of. So... is there a way to play a minionmancer from level 1? Or level 2 or 3? (Illusionist has a similar problem, made worse by the fact that Warlocks do it better at level 2, and either just as well or better from level 6 to 10, but at least getting a bonus cantrip is more wizardy.)

[Dork_Forge]

Some early game sources of 'minions' to consider:

-Find Familiar (note this can be tacked onto any build using V.Human and a more powerful familiar from a Chainlock.

-Flock of Familiars

-Ranger Animal Companion

-Artificer Steel Defender

UA considerations:

-Pact of the Raven Queen's Raven

-Wild Fire Druids... fire spirit thing, I only vaguely remember that UA

[Segev]

Some early game sources of 'minions' to consider:

-Find Familiar (note this can be tacked onto any build using V.Human and a more powerful familiar from a Chainlock.

-Flock of Familiars

-Ranger Animal Companion

-Artificer Steel Defender

UA considerations:

-Pact of the Raven Queen's Raven

-Wild Fire Druids... fire spirit thing, I only vaguely remember that UA

All good points. And I'm not familiar with "flock of familiars," and would appreciate elaboration.

However, my question is more about if there are any tricks to get a Necromancer to actually feel like a member of his subclass before level 5. Are there any funny familiars that are "undead-ish?" I know there's a nightwhistle that anybody can use, but which at least would be thematic...if you can get your hands on one. It's a huge barrier to entry for me, despite really liking necromancy, because any character concept that is "a necromancer" (rather than "a generic wizard") is...a level 5+, preferably 6+ build. Prior to that, he's a goth cosplayer who is a wizard. And has a minor tanking trick, which is...weird on a wizard.

[Dork_Forge]

All good points. And I'm not familiar with "flock of familiars," and would appreciate elaboration.

However, my question is more about if there are any tricks to get a Necromancer to actually feel like a member of his subclass before level 5. Are there any funny familiars that are "undead-ish?" I know there's a nightwhistle that anybody can use, but which at least would be thematic...if you can get your hands on one. It's a huge barrier to entry for me, despite really liking necromancy, because any character concept that is "a necromancer" (rather than "a generic wizard") is...a level 5+, preferably 6+ build. Prior to that, he's a goth cosplayer who is a wizard. And has a minor tanking trick, which is...weird on a wizard.

Flock of familiars is a 2nd level spell introduced in the Lost Labratory of Kwalish adventure:


You temporarily summon three familiars – spirits that take animal forms of your choice. Each familiar uses the same rules and options for a familiar conjured by the Find Familiar spell. All the familiars conjured by this spell must be the same type of creature (celestials, fey, or fiends; your choice). If you already have a familiar conjured by the Find Familiar spell or similar means, then one fewer familiars are conjured by this spell.

Familiars summoned by this spell can telepathically communicate with you and share their visual or auditory senses while they are within 1 mile of you.

When you cast a spell with a range of touch, one of the familiars conjured by this spell can deliver the spell, as normal. However, you can cast a touch spell through only one familiar per turn.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd level or higher, you conjure an additional familiar for each slot level above 2nd.

Ahh I see, apologies from the wording of the original post I thought you were looking for early level minionmancy in general. Besides just refluffing your familiar as an undead create (either in a state of decay or straight up skeletal) I don't think there's anything RAW that would address this. Homebrew wise maybe give them the ability to create/summon a minor undead like a Crawling Claw or even a single Zombie/Skeleton that only lasts an hour or something.

[Segev]

That's what I thought and was afraid of. I may have to homebrew an alternate level 2 feature for necromancers. :smallannoyed:

[SociopathFriend]

Necromancers in 5e have a fairly nice boost to the effectiveness of their undead at level 6. Their level 14 subclass capstone is also pretty nice, giving them the only Command Undead effect in the game.


There are several actually- I was tempted once upon a time to make a Necromancer Guide in 5e but determined it would be kind of difficult as Necromancer is a Playstyle not a Class. I'd have to look at something like 4 different classes for every given section. Though with the virus I might end up with freetime...
An Oathbreaker Paladin can Command a given Undead for 24 hours for example at level 2. It's a more limited control but nonetheless it's a way to Command an Undead you didn't create.

But for the rest of your question:

At least, not that I can think of. So... is there a way to play a minionmancer from level 1? Or level 2 or 3? (Illusionist has a similar problem, made worse by the fact that Warlocks do it better at level 2, and either just as well or better from level 6 to 10, but at least getting a bonus cantrip is more wizardy.)

At level 1 you are basically a minion. In fact you would lose to your own minions.
At level 6 your basic Zombie will have:
28 hp on average
A slam attack that deals 1d6 + 4 damage
And if you drop them to 0 they get a Con Save to not die

If that thing managed to walk up to your same Wizard at level 1 it has genuine potential to one-shot you. Same with level 2 depending on your HP gaining method and Con stat.
A level 3 Fighter would have a fairly even battle against this thing. Think about that for a moment- especially if you armor the thing and give it a real weapon.

You need to gain power first before you can have power over others. That's just a given.

[Sigreid]

If you're interested, the Masters of Death offering on DM's Guild has the Deathmaster. Which gets a pet at level 3 as a permanently bound undead minion.

[Segev]

There are several actually- I was tempted once upon a time to make a Necromancer Guide in 5e but determined it would be kind of difficult as Necromancer is a Playstyle not a Class. I'd have to look at something like 4 different classes for every given section. Though with the virus I might end up with freetime...
An Oathbreaker Paladin can Command a given Undead for 24 hours for example at level 2. It's a more limited control but nonetheless it's a way to Command an Undead you didn't create.Hrm. Not...how I'd like to play a necromancer, but worth considering. Thanks.


At level 1 you are basically a minion. In fact you would lose to your own minions.
At level 6 your basic Zombie will have:
28 hp on average
A slam attack that deals 1d6 + 4 damage
And if you drop them to 0 they get a Con Save to not die

If that thing managed to walk up to your same Wizard at level 1 it has genuine potential to one-shot you. Same with level 2 depending on your HP gaining method and Con stat.
A level 3 Fighter would have a fairly even battle against this thing. Think about that for a moment- especially if you armor the thing and give it a real weapon.

You need to gain power first before you can have power over others. That's just a given.That's a buffed-by-a-level-6-necromancer minion, though. A zombie is...weaker. Still tough, mind you. CR 1/2 monsters are a tough fight for a lone level 1 character. I'd be happy with getting it at level 2, when you declare yourself a necromancer.


If you're interested, the Masters of Death offering on DM's Guild has the Deathmaster. Which gets a pet at level 3 as a permanently bound undead minion.I may have to give that a look. Thanks!

Edit: I don't see this offering. The adventure, "Master of Death," doesn't look like it has a class in it.

[MaxWilson]

At least, not that I can think of. So... is there a way to play a minionmancer from level 1? Or level 2 or 3? (Illusionist has a similar problem, made worse by the fact that Warlocks do it better at level 2, and either just as well or better from level 6 to 10, but at least getting a bonus cantrip is more wizardy.)

I'll give you the same advice I would give one of my players:

Nothing forbids custom spell research, and it would be perfectly fine and balanced to have e.g. a second-level 1 hour (concentration) spell with a casting time of 1 minute which creates a standard zombie. (Compare to Spiritual Weapon, which requires no concentration and cannot be killed, and casts with a bonus action.) Call it Second Life or something.

If you choose to research this spell in my game, I will rate it as a standard-power second-level spell, which means you will need two make two successful DC 12 Arcana checks, at a price of 200 gp per week of study and one attempted check per week, and you must not fail three checks in a row or the research dead-ends and you must start over from the beginning. You must also have access to a level 2 research library to accomplish this, which costs 4000 gp to assemble [level^2 * 1000 gp], but your PC is very likely to already have connections to someone with at least a low-level research library.

Long story short: it will probably take you 2-3 weeks to research this spell, and cost about 500 gold.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I mean, if you want minionmancy from level 1, my Guide to Greatness has a Summoner base class that gets a buddy from the get-go. Admittedly it's a single-strong-minion style rather than a horde, and right now it only does outsiders, but if you're interested I can write up a necromancer option.

Otherwise, your best bet is probably to just write some low-level necromancy spells that do what you want. Animal Friendship can become Command Undead with one find-and-replace. A second level spell to summon a single skeleton or zombie for, say, 10 minutes with Concentration should be fine. Heck, "Conjure Crawling Claw" would work as a first level.

[Segev]

I will take a look at the summoner idea. I did like the “trade a familiar for a scaling skeleton” features in 3.PF.

The ideas of researching spells are good ones; balancing them is tricky, because I get greedy too easily, but thank you in particular for pointing out that Animal Friendship could swap out for Command Undead with some simple changes. That’s a really good idea, and is very likely to hit the right balance point and do what I would like.


Crawling claws are also an interesting solution. They’re a little strong to be familiars, at least for the basic first level spell. The blindsight is really good. ...then again, bats give twice the distance. Hm.

I do wish there was some indication in monster texts for when they say “dark rituals” are used to make things so that you had some idea what level they’re made at.

Would Create Crawling Claw be a 1st level Necromancy and a Ritual? 2nd? Surely no more than 3rd, as they’re not even as strong as zombies.

Thanks again for the ideas!

[Segev]

Command Undead
1st-level necromancy
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, S, M (a bit of bone or flesh)
Duration: 24 hours

This spell lets you exert control over an undead creature. Choose an undead creature of CR 1 or lower that you can see within range. It must be able to perceive you. It must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or be charmed by you for the spell's duration. While Charmed in this way, it obeys your directions if they align with its nature. Those which do not, or orders to refrain from their natural urges, require Charisma (Persuasion) opposed by their Charisma save. Any effect which turns undead ends this spell.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, you can affect one additional undead per level above 1st, and the maximum CR of undead you may affect increases. The sum of all targets' CRs may not exceed the level of the spell slot expended.

Commentary: The only undead in the monster manual which are not immune to the Charmed condition are shadows, skeletons, vampires, vampire spawn, wights, will-o-wisps, and zombies. Vampires have a CR higher than 9, so can't be controlled anyway. Weirdly, while wights are not immune to being Charmed, ghasts and ghouls are.

I used CR rather than intellect to limit possible targets due to intelligence of undead being all over the place. Skeletons and zombies, for instance, have intelligences above the 4 that would have limited whether Beasts could be charmed by animal friendship. I codified precise mechanisms for control of behavior that were lacking in animal friendship, though I don't think this increases the power beyond what animal friendship intends for control over the beasts.



An additional thought, as an alternate subclass feature for Grim Harvest:

Voice of the Necromaster: At 2nd level, when you become a Necromancer, you gain the ability to ignore immunity to the Charmed condition possessed by undead creatures when casting spells on them.

Another new spell:

The Sinister Ritual (aka Create Crawling Claw)
1st-level necromancy (ritual)
Casting Time: 1 hour
Range: 10 feet
Components: V, S, M (10 gp worth of gruesome ingredients which are consumed by the spell, and the left hand of a murderer that is also the target)
Duration: intantaneous

You animate the severed left hand of a murderer into a Crawling Claw. The murderer must still be alive, or have been dead for no more than one week and not been raised from the dead or turned into another sort of undead creature, or the spell fails.

At higher levels. When cast from a 2nd level or higher slot, the maximum time since the murderer died increases by one month per level above 1st. If cast from a 6th level or higher slot, it increases to one year per level above 5th. If cast from a 9th level slot, the murderer may have been dead for any length of time. In addition, you may animate an additional Crawling Claw (from additional murderers) for each level of spell slot used above 1st.

[Necromas]

Would Create Crawling Claw be a 1st level Necromancy and a Ritual? 2nd? Surely no more than 3rd, as they’re not even as strong as zombies.


I've seen homebrew spells that allow you to animate either a crawling claw or a very low CR animal with an undead template. Don't remember how they went but here's what I'd do with them.

Crawling claw as a first level spell. Give it a duration of about an hour, as 1st level spells don't typically give long term offensive benefits. Would be okay though to let the spell be upcast to all-day at a second level slot.

Animate animals as a second level spell. This one is a bit trickier as even CR 1/8 beasts can do significantly more damage than a skeleton or zombie even though those are CR 1/4 creatures. So up to CR 1/8 beasts but limit the duration to an hour again to limit the craziness. Do not let them upcast to maintain all day as that just muddles things too much if you have an army of beasts and skeletons and zombies.

I would definitely not let either of them be rituals. Getting a minion without even spending a spell slot is way too OP.

[Biggstick]

Necromancers in 5e have a fairly nice boost to the effectiveness of their undead at level 6. Their level 14 subclass capstone is also pretty nice, giving them the only Command Undead effect in the game.

However, Warlocks, Barbarian, Fighter...most classes, really, "come online" by level 3 at the latest. Wizard subclasses...are a mixed bag. Abjurer, Evoker, Conjuror, and Diviner get good, flavorful abilities that make them feel like their namesake expert early. Level 2. Illusionist and Necromancer...get things that barely fit. Necromancer's is particularly bad. "Gain extra hp when you kill a thing with a specific subset of spells."

It neither helps the necromancer kill things, manipulate the dead, nor anything else...except tank. Which he's hardly designed for. (Makes him a good dip for a gish, though.)

Now, I know I'm kind-of in the minority here, but to me, the iconic necromancer is the lord of the undead. But you can't even have one undead minion before level 5. Level 6 to actually be better at it than any other wizard.

At least in 3e, the spell command undead let a base, core-book wizard (Necromancer or not) get ahold of some skeletal or zombie minions. Or make friends with smarter undead. In 5e, there's nothing like that.

At least, not that I can think of. So... is there a way to play a minionmancer from level 1? Or level 2 or 3? (Illusionist has a similar problem, made worse by the fact that Warlocks do it better at level 2, and either just as well or better from level 6 to 10, but at least getting a bonus cantrip is more wizardy.)

Valor and Swords Bards don't "come online" until they're level 6. The same is true of Shadow Monks and Berserker Barbarians in that they don't come online till level 6. The idea of a class not achieving what some folks expect it to be able to do until later in their leveling process is one that I'm ok with.

Are you saying Illusionists don't have a good level 2 feature? Being able to have your Minor Illusions create both an image and a sound with a single casting can be quite powerful in the hands of an imaginative Player, and very much so fits in line with the idea of an Illusionist.

Necromancy spells include things other then controlling the Undead. Donjon lists 36 Necromancy spells and includes cantrips to level 9 spells. Out of these 36 spells, only 5 of them create Undead. For these 5 spells that create Undead, the Necromancy Wizard has a pretty awesome level 6 feature. Outside of that though, the Necromancy Wizard isn't completely about controlling the Undead, but controlling Necromancy magic. Step a little further back from the focus on controlling Undead to everything that Necromancy magic touches and the other features will make sense.

Additionally, temporary HP isn't about tanking. Wizards don't typically make good tanks; getting the temporary HP simply gives a small buffer for the Necromancer should they get hit by something, giving them an opportunity to possibly escape. It also represents a Necromancy Wizard's beginning mastery over the manipulation of life, in that by killing something, they themselves become temporarily stronger through the gaining of temporary HP.

The Necromancy school is fine as is imo.

[MaxWilson]

Command Undead
1st-level necromancy
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, S, M (a bit of bone or flesh)
Duration: 24 hours

This spell lets you exert control over an undead creature. Choose an undead creature of CR 1 or lower that you can see within range. It must be able to perceive you. It must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or be charmed by you for the spell's duration. While Charmed in this way, it obeys your directions if they align with its nature. Those which do not, or orders to refrain from their natural urges, require Charisma (Persuasion) opposed by their Charisma save. Any effect which turns undead ends this spell.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, you can affect one additional undead per level above 1st, and the maximum CR of undead you may affect increases. The sum of all targets' CRs may not exceed the level of the spell slot expended.

Commentary: The only undead in the monster manual which are not immune to the Charmed condition are shadows, skeletons, vampires, vampire spawn, wights, will-o-wisps, and zombies. Vampires have a CR higher than 9, so can't be controlled anyway. Weirdly, while wights are not immune to being Charmed, ghasts and ghouls are.

I used CR rather than intellect to limit possible targets due to intelligence of undead being all over the place. Skeletons and zombies, for instance, have intelligences above the 4 that would have limited whether Beasts could be charmed by animal friendship. I codified precise mechanisms for control of behavior that were lacking in animal friendship, though I don't think this increases the power beyond what animal friendship intends for control over the beasts.

...

Another new spell:

The Sinister Ritual (aka Create Crawling Claw)
1st-level necromancy (ritual)
Casting Time: 1 hour
Range: 10 feet
Components: V, S, M (10 gp worth of gruesome ingredients which are consumed by the spell, and the left hand of a murderer that is also the target)
Duration: intantaneous

You animate the severed left hand of a murderer into a Crawling Claw. The murderer must still be alive, or have been dead for no more than one week and not been raised from the dead or turned into another sort of undead creature, or the spell fails.

At higher levels. When cast from a 2nd level or higher slot, the maximum time since the murderer died increases by one month per level above 1st. If cast from a 6th level or higher slot, it increases to one year per level above 5th. If cast from a 9th level slot, the murderer may have been dead for any length of time. In addition, you may animate an additional Crawling Claw (from additional murderers) for each level of spell slot used above 1st.

Sure, these spells are about the right power level. I'd allow either of these spells via spell research. I'd also allow them as auto-picks on level-up if the player so desires.

I'd add one caveat though: you can only create one hand per murderer. If his original hand grows back somehow, due to Regenerate or whatever, the claw made from his hand is destroyed (becomes inert). No infinite hand spam.

I wouldn't allow Voice of the Necromaster as an alternate subclass feature though. Too powerful. No you may not Hypnotic Pattern a bunch of Wraiths or Mass Suggestion + Geas a lich.

[Deathtongue]

Valor and Swords Bards don't "come online" until they're level 6. The same is true of Shadow Monks and Berserker Barbarians in that they don't come online till level 6. The idea of a class not achieving what some folks expect it to be able to do until later in their leveling process is one that I'm ok with.The Necromancer stands out conspicuously because it alone is the sole wizard subclass that takes until level 6 before it feels meaningfully different from other wizard subclasses. Evoker, Diviner, Bladesinger, War Wizard, Enchanter, and Illusionist get their gamechanger features at level 2. Conjurer and Transmuter might be underpowered in combat but at least in the pure roleplaying parts of the game they're meaningfully distinct. And while Abjurer is frankly pretty boring and passive, at least its ability is very effective when you get it.

And what percentage of 5E D&D games get to level 6-7? I doubt that it's even half of them. And if I'm unsure whether my campaign is going to get past level 4 or 5, why would I pick Necromancer at all?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Valor and Swords Bards don't "come online" until they're level 6. The same is true of Shadow Monks and Berserker Barbarians in that they don't come online till level 6.
But I can play a Bard with a sword or a sneaky Monk from level 1 and it'll work just fine. There's not really anything compatible for an "I make zombies" necromancer.

[Biggstick]

The Necromancer stands out conspicuously because it alone is the sole wizard subclass that takes until level 6 before it feels meaningfully different from other wizard subclasses. Evoker, Diviner, Bladesinger, War Wizard, Enchanter, and Illusionist get their gamechanger features at level 2. Conjurer and Transmuter might be underpowered in combat but at least in the pure roleplaying parts of the game they're meaningfully distinct. And while Abjurer is frankly pretty boring and passive, at least its ability is very effective when you get it.

And what percentage of 5E D&D games get to level 6-7? I doubt that it's even half of them. And if I'm unsure whether my campaign is going to get past level 4 or 5, why would I pick Necromancer at all?

Not every level 2 ability is equal for Wizards. Nor is every level 6 ability equal for Wizards.

This information holds true for all the other classes.

I'll use Barbarians as an example. Bear Totem Barbarians are typically reviewed as being one of the best choices any Barbarian can make. However, their level 6 features are more focused around non-combat abilities (obviously some can be used for combat). People will talk trash about Berserker Barbarians, but they have arguably the most powerful level 6 feature for any Barbarian; they gain immunity to fear and charm effects while raging.

Why does the Berserker Barbarian have to wait until level 6 until it gets it's great feature?! I'm not necessarily sure why, but this feature separates the Berserker Barbarian from others. This is a Barbarian archetype that's built around the middle to later stages of Tier 2 content; not around Tier 1.

Valor and Swords Bards are in the same boat. Why do they have to wait until level 6 before getting their second attack? How many sessions do they have to play without having this feature?! They're just like every other Bard until that point. Why would anyone ever choose to play a Bard archetype that's just like every other Bard...

What I'm getting at is that if you're wanting to play a Necromancy school Wizard, just realize that it's time comes in the middle of Tier 2 content. Not every class is going to be an all star in every Tier of play.

[Biggstick]

But I can play a Bard with a sword or a sneaky Monk from level 1 and it'll work just fine. There's not really anything compatible for an "I make zombies" necromancer.

They can still use Necromancy spells just fine at level 1.

An "I make zombies" Necromancer isn't available to PCs at level 1.

Any summoner based class isn't going to be able to shine until level 5. Tier 2 is what seems to be the time frame that WOTC decided significant summoning spells can start being available to PCs.

[Deathtongue]

Not every level 2 ability is equal for Wizards. Nor is every level 6 ability equal for Wizards.

This information holds true for all the other classes. The thing is, even if the wizards aren't all equally powerful in combat/roleplay, they come together as a core build by level 2 except for Necromancer. The Illusionist's L2 perk is nowhere as strong as the Evoker's L2 perk, but the core concept of the build already functions by then.

This isn't so for the Necromancer. You need to wait until level 5 before you actually start doing archetypical Necromancer things and really you need to be level 6 before you do it any better than other wizards.

And more to the point: just because certain subclasses take too long to thematically come online doesn't mean it's an okay design decision. Especially not in a game that markets itself as new player-friendly. Most D&D games end before level 6-7, so it screws over players not familiar with the rules and the metagame to make them wait that long. What kind of message does that send someone who sat down to play D&D, that after two months of playing and the game ends that their necromancer never got to summon a zombie or their valor bard never got to competently fight in melee?


An "I make zombies" Necromancer isn't available to PCs at level 1.
Making undead is core to the feel of a necromancer in fantasy fiction. All that other stuff like draining hit points and communicating with the spirits is just genre flotsam. Saying that making zombies isn't important to the feel of a necromancer is like saying that Robin Hood's archery skills isn't important to the feel of the character.

[Segev]

Valor and Swords Bards don't "come online" until they're level 6. The same is true of Shadow Monks and Berserker Barbarians in that they don't come online till level 6. The idea of a class not achieving what some folks expect it to be able to do until later in their leveling process is one that I'm ok with. I...disagree. Both feel significantly different than "just a bard" or than the alternative bard types at level 3. Heck, swords bard gets its not-superiority-dice tricks at level 3.

Shadow monks are throwing around darkness effects as soon as they enter the class, and Berserker barbarians get Frenzy (lame as the ability is due to the exhaustion mechanic) at level 3. That's...pretty iconic.


Are you saying Illusionists don't have a good level 2 feature? Being able to have your Minor Illusions create both an image and a sound with a single casting can be quite powerful in the hands of an imaginative Player, and very much so fits in line with the idea of an Illusionist.I'd love some examples. I originally thought it was pretty good, myself. But then I really looked at what minor illusion can do with an image, and it's actually really hard to think of a situation where the still image of an object makes sounds. Admittedly, you could say they're getting two spell effects at once: an image to hide in or something, and a sound effect they can move around. But that's not what it sounds like the designers had in mind. So either minor illusion is a lot more flexible with its images than I've been led to believe, or this was not as well thought-out as the designers could have made it be.


Necromancy spells include things other then controlling the Undead. Donjon lists 36 Necromancy spells and includes cantrips to level 9 spells. Out of these 36 spells, only 5 of them create Undead. For these 5 spells that create Undead, the Necromancy Wizard has a pretty awesome level 6 feature. Outside of that though, the Necromancy Wizard isn't completely about controlling the Undead, but controlling Necromancy magic. Step a little further back from the focus on controlling Undead to everything that Necromancy magic touches and the other features will make sense.

Additionally, temporary HP isn't about tanking. Wizards don't typically make good tanks; getting the temporary HP simply gives a small buffer for the Necromancer should they get hit by something, giving them an opportunity to possibly escape. It also represents a Necromancy Wizard's beginning mastery over the manipulation of life, in that by killing something, they themselves become temporarily stronger through the gaining of temporary HP.

The Necromancy school is fine as is imo.Necromancy does do more than control the undead, yes. But if you say "necromancer," and then tell somebody that the guy does single-target and AOE damage and debuffs, you're going to get people looking at you funny. "Isn't that what every wizard does?"

And you say, "temporary hp isn't about tanking," go on to acknowledge why it would be silly for wizards to treat it as such, but then don't elaborate on what it is. Yes, I get it, it's "thematic" with the "controlling life force" thing, but it doesn't really accomplish much in terms of setting tone and mood. Because the level 6 and 14 abilities focus on mastery of the undead, and the level 10 ability focuses on actually controlling one's own life force, the level 1 ability (which is this weird defensive buff based on an offensive act) feels out of place. It certainly, by itself, doesn't feel particularly "oh, that's a necromancer we're dealing with."

I'm going to have to come back to this, as I want to explore how I'd try to focus it for necromancy better without being focused on the undead and don't have time right now.


The thing is, even if the wizards aren't all equally powerful in combat/roleplay, they come together as a core build by level 2 except for Necromancer. The Illusionist's L2 perk is nowhere as strong as the Evoker's L2 perk, but the core concept of the build already functions by then.

This isn't so for the Necromancer. You need to wait until level 5 before you actually start doing archetypical Necromancer things and really you need to be level 6 before you do it any better than other wizards.

And more to the point: just because certain subclasses take too long to thematically come online doesn't mean it's an okay design decision. Especially not in a game that markets itself as new player-friendly. Most D&D games end before level 6-7, so it screws over players not familiar with the rules and the metagame to make them wait that long. What kind of message does that send someone who sat down to play D&D, that after two months of playing and the game ends that their necromancer never got to summon a zombie or their valor bard never got to competently fight in melee?


Making undead is core to the feel of a necromancer in fantasy fiction. All that other stuff like draining hit points and communicating with the spirits is just genre flotsam. Saying that making zombies isn't important to the feel of a necromancer is like saying that Robin Hood's archery skills isn't important to the feel of the character.
I fully agree with most of this. In particular the example of Robin Hood. I will say that "communicating with spirits" and "draining hit points" could feel necromantic, but it's got to be more than 'oh, um, if you kill a dude, you get some temp hp.' That's a weak version of a 3rd level spell that every wizard can cast.

Conjurors get to create items. Conjuring things. Diviners have Portent, which speaks for itself. Abjurers feel almost as meh to me as Necromancers, but at least a ward of extra hp is very in-style for them: they're all about barriers and protection.

I still wouldn't be satisfied with it, because my desire is for a necromaster, but if the Necromancer level 2 power was something like, "When you deal damage with a Necromancy spell of first level or higher, you add them to your Necromantic Pool. You can store up to the number of wizard spells you can prepare. You can touch another creature as an action on your turn to heal them any number of hit points, up to the number in your pool. Your pool loses the hit points so healed," it would at least feel like you're really manipulating life force.




On Voice of the Necromancer, you're right, MaxWilson, that I didn't think about things like Hypnotic Pattern or Geas being used on liches. I'll point out that you CAN use it on vampires as-is, though, so is it really that overpowered? Could limit it to Necromancy spells, but that makes it pretty narrowly focused.

[MaxWilson]

The thing is, even if the wizards aren't all equally powerful in combat/roleplay, they come together as a core build by level 2 except for Necromancer. The Illusionist's L2 perk is nowhere as strong as the Evoker's L2 perk, but the core concept of the build already functions by then.

This isn't so for the Necromancer. You need to wait until level 5 before you actually start doing archetypical Necromancer things and really you need to be level 6 before you do it any better than other wizards.

Meh. Evokers' L2 perk isn't really worthwhile until L5, and the Illusionist's L2 perk is really hard to use at all if your DM runs Minor Illusion correctly. (The audio portion is great, but the unmoving image that you can't interact with is pretty useless, and *everybody* gets the audio portion not just illusionists.)

So up until L5, the Necromancer is about as good of an arty mage as an Evoker, and until L6 he's as good of an illusionist as an Illusionist. Before that the one thing he's really good at its sucking life out of enemies (or 2cp chickens) via spells like Dragon's Breath and Flaming Sphere. At L6 though he really comes into his own.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Another point against Grim Harvest is that it's entirely passive-- even more than Arcane Ward, which at least feels like something significant you're deliberately putting up. Illusionist may boil down to "you get another cantrip," but even that is something you actively choose to use during the game. Grim Harvest is a minor side effect occasionally attached to the things you were already doing.

[MaxWilson]

Another point against Grim Harvest is that it's entirely passive-- even more than Arcane Ward, which at least feels like something significant you're deliberately putting up. Illusionist may boil down to "you get another cantrip," but even that is something you actively choose to use during the game. Grim Harvest is a minor side effect occasionally attached to the things you were already doing.

No, Grim Harvest is very proactive, because if you want to use it to heal from 1 HP to full HP in a single turn, you need to prepare your sacrifices in advance. (A flock of 2cp 1 HP chickens, and a Flaming Sphere spell.)

Remember that Grim Harvest heals once per turn, not per round, doesn't require targets to be hostile, and unlike Vampiric Touch can heal more damage than was dealt as long as the target dies. If twelve chickens all end their turns within a Flaming Sphere's AoE, that's twelve turns with a death, and twelve times the necromancer gains +4 HP.

It's not really very powerful compared to e.g. Healing Spirit, but it is very flavorful. Evil wizard with his flock of devoted little birds, all of whom he someday intends to slaughter for their life force... You may overhear the wizard saying things like "I love the feeling of being surrounded by fragile little lives. It makes me feel safe."

[MaxWilson]

On Voice of the Necromancer, you're right, MaxWilson, that I didn't think about things like Hypnotic Pattern or Geas being used on liches. I'll point out that you CAN use it on vampires as-is, though, so is it really that overpowered? Could limit it to Necromancy spells, but that makes it pretty narrowly focused.

I feel that it moves Hypnotic Pattern from a great spell with some serious downsides because so many really nasty undead (like wraiths and specters) are immune, to an always-keep-prepared spell that works against almost everything except obviously-mechanical constructs. It also has lategame utility. Instead of having to leverage specifically undead which are vulnerable to charm, like Wights, now you get to Geas and Mass Suggestion *everything*.

It's a significant power boost to a subclass which already has a higher-than-average number of strong abilities.

[Segev]

I feel that it moves Hypnotic Pattern from a great spell with some serious downsides because so many really nasty undead (like wraiths and specters) are immune, to an always-keep-prepared spell that works against almost everything except obviously-mechanical constructs. It also has lategame utility. Instead of having to leverage specifically undead which are vulnerable to charm, like Wights, now you get to Geas and Mass Suggestion *everything*.

It's a significant power boost to a subclass which already has a higher-than-average number of strong abilities.

If it's just "nasty undead" that are the only thing that keeps it from being overpowered, that sounds like it's already overpowered. Are there really only undead that are immune to Charmed?

(Also, it theoretically would work on Vampires as-is, then. Except they have legendary resistance.)


With the existence of command undead, it could be made to just work for Necromancy spells. Without it, it'd be useless, since no Necromancy printed deals with the Charmed condition.

[MaxWilson]

If it's just "nasty undead" that are the only thing that keeps it from being overpowered, that sounds like it's already overpowered. Are there really only undead that are immune to Charmed?

There are some constructs and things too, but the ones that really scare me (en masse) are all undead: Wraiths, Spectres, Banshees, Shadows. When I'm considering e.g. Hypnotic Pattern vs. Confusion, Confusion is weaker but Hypnotic Pattern is less reliable.

[Segev]

There are some constructs and things too, but the ones that really scare me (en masse) are all undead: Wraiths, Spectres, Banshees, Shadows. When I'm considering e.g. Hypnotic Pattern vs. Confusion, Confusion is weaker but Hypnotic Pattern is less reliable.

Shadows aren't immune to being Charmed.

And you get wraiths, specters, and banshees en masse? :smalleek:

This would require one of two additional alterations to core book assumptions, but how's this?

Voice of the Necromancer: When casting a Necromancy spell, you may cause it to ignore any immunity to the Charmed condition possessed by any undead it affects.



By restricting it to Necromancy spells, you won't get hypnotic pattern being used on these undead.


The two possible chances that would be needed would either be a litany of Necromancy spells that afflict undead with the Charmed condition (though really, just the proposed command undead would probably suffice for starters), or some specialized rule that let Necromancers research Necromancy versions of spells that inflict the Charmed condition, but which only can be used to target undead.



Another possibility comes to mind:

Rebuke Undead: At 2nd level, when you specialize in Necromancy, you gain the ability to rebuke undead who dare attack you. As a reaction when an undead creature takes an action against you that would be forbidden by the Charmed condition, you may force that creature to make a Charisma save against your spell save DC. If they fail, they are Charmed by you for the next minute and must choose a new target for the action which triggered this, so as not to include you in it. This ability ignores undead creatures' immunity to the Charmed condition, if any. While Charmed by you in this way, the creature cannot be immune to the Charmed condition you inflict upon it by any other means, and this effect's duration extends to match that of any such Charm-inflicting effect.

The creature receives a new saving throw any time you inflict damage upon it. You may only use this ability on a given creature once. You regain the ability to use it on creatures you've already used it on after a Short Rest.


(In case it is inobvious, this ability is designed to replace Grim Harvest.)

[MaxWilson]

Shadows aren't immune to being Charmed.

Oh, you're right! Thanks, good to know.


And you get wraiths, specters, and banshees en masse? :smalleek:

Yes, especially specters because wraiths can produce them en masse. 1 wraith = 7 specters. (Actually it's even worse than that--1 Wraith in a village can create nigh-unlimited specters, it just can't control more than 7 at a time.)


Voice of the Necromancer: When casting a Necromancy spell, you may cause it to ignore any immunity to the Charmed condition possessed by any undead it affects.

By restricting it to Necromancy spells, you won't get hypnotic pattern being used on these undead.

Sure, seems okay. It's basically a convoluted way of creating spells that can only be cast by a Necromancer, but as long as those spells are themselves roughly on par with existing spells it's more flavorful than powerful--just like Grim Harvest.


The two possible chances that would be needed would either be a litany of Necromancy spells that afflict undead with the Charmed condition (though really, just the proposed command undead would probably suffice for starters), or some specialized rule that let Necromancers research Necromancy versions of spells that inflict the Charmed condition, but which only can be used to target undead.

Yep. Both seem fine to me. I would have no objections if a player wanted this for themselves. Being able to control a Wraith with a 5th level spell slot seems fine, especially since it's not guaranteed to work. Controlling 1 Wraith with up to 7 Specters is probably more powerful than controlling 8 skeletons with the same spell slot, but (1) the Wraith and Specters won't have the Undead Thrall buffs, and (2) maintaining long-term control of the Wraith isn't feasible.


Another possibility comes to mind:

Rebuke Undead: At 2nd level, when you specialize in Necromancy, you gain the ability to rebuke undead who dare attack you. As a reaction when an undead creature takes an action against you that would be forbidden by the Charmed condition, you may force that creature to make a Charisma save against your spell save DC. If they fail, they are Charmed by you for the next minute and must choose a new target for the action which triggered this, so as not to include you in it. This ability ignores undead creatures' immunity to the Charmed condition, if any. While Charmed by you in this way, the creature cannot be immune to the Charmed condition you inflict upon it by any other means, and this effect's duration extends to match that of any such Charm-inflicting effect.

The creature receives a new saving throw any time you inflict damage upon it. You may only use this ability on a given creature once. You regain the ability to use it on creatures you've already used it on after a Short Rest.

(In case it is inobvious, this ability is designed to replace Grim Harvest.)

I think it would be more in-keeping with 5E's design to make this ability function only a limited number of times, e.g. once per short rest. (Currently it is at-will, works on unlimited numbers of undead creatures, even if it can't be re-used on the same creature multiple times without resting.) There are so many feats that give you an interesting minor ability and then restrict it to once per short rest that just handing out an interesting ability and saying "you get to use this whenever" is remarkable by comparison.

On the other hand, I dislike that part of 5E's design, and I've houseruled away some of those per-rest limitations for e.g. Battlemaster superiority dice to make them more accessible by giving up something else, so frankly I'd probably let you have this one anyway if you really wanted it. It is more powerful than Grim Harvest, so definitely a tiny bit of power creep, but eh, 5E isn't very well-balanced anyway and I can definitely see this ability enhancing some player's fun, so yes. I'd allow it.

[Segev]

Oh, you're right! Thanks, good to know.You're welcome. I actually went through the MM last night looking for every undead in it to figure out which ones were and were not immune to being Charmed. I was surprised both ways with some of them. I can't for the life of me figure out why ghasts and especially ghouls are immune to being Charmed, but shadows aren't.


Yes, especially specters because wraiths can produce them en masse. 1 wraith = 7 specters. (Actually it's even worse than that--1 Wraith in a village can create nigh-unlimited specters, it just can't control more than 7 at a time.)Fair enough. Though that actually seems more reason for spectres to lack the immunity (while wraiths get it).


Sure, seems okay. It's basically a convoluted way of creating spells that can only be cast by a Necromancer, but as long as those spells are themselves roughly on par with existing spells it's more flavorful than powerful--just like Grim Harvest.Well, sort-of. Any of those spells would work just fine for any wizard (or other caster who could get them) on, say, zombies, skeletons, and shadows. And vampire spawn, and vampires (if the vampire doesn't use legendary resistanc e on it).And Alhoon, weirdly enough. But not liches. I'm not 100% sure what the reasoning is behind the decision in every case.


I think it would be more in-keeping with 5E's design to make this ability function only a limited number of times, e.g. once per short rest. (Currently it is at-will, works on unlimited numbers of undead creatures, even if it can't be re-used on the same creature multiple times without resting.) There are so many feats that give you an interesting minor ability and then restrict it to once per short rest that just handing out an interesting ability and saying "you get to use this whenever" is

On the other hand, I dislike that part of 5E's design, and I've houseruled away some of those per-rest limitations for e.g. Battlemaster superiority dice to make them more accessible by giving up something else, so frankly I'd probably let you have this one anyway if you really wanted it. It is more powerful than Grim Harvest, so definitely a tiny bit of power creep, but eh, 5E isn't very well-balanced anyway and I can definitely see this ability enhancing some player's fun, so yes. I'd allow it.
Yeah, I also dislike it. I applaud 5e, overall, for its greater willingness than earlier editions to give cool, flavorful abilities out without fear of it being overpowered. They seem to have gotten a lot more comfortable with evaluating whether things are REALLY all that powerful, or just look like it on first glance. Or are powerful in a sideways enough way that it doesn't overwhelm things, just give new fun options. But then they often turn around and limit them to once per short rest or long rest, and that makes them feel awkward to use.

The reason I have this set up as at-will, but restricted per-target, is because it's single target. Making it once per Short Rest and single target means it becomes very much a "bigger spider" ability. Saved for the vampire you're afraid is around the corner rather than the one zombie that broke through the front lines in this horde. After all, there are a half-dozen other zombies (or ghouls, or I guess spectres), so using it on this one is useless, right?

If it's to be once per short rest, I'd model it much more closely on Channel Divinity.

Rebuke Undead: With a glare, a gesture, or an imprecation, you exert your will over undead that dare defy you. As an action, you may force every undead creature within 60 feet to make a Wisdom Save against your Wizard Spell DC. Choose Charmed or Frightened. Creatures which fail this save suffer the chosen condition for the next minute, even if they would otherwise be immune, with you as the focus. If you chose Charmed, select up to your wizard level in total CR amongst these creatures. You can ignore any immunity to being Charmed the chosen creatures may have when targeting them with your [possibly just Necromancy] spells, and this ability's duration extends to match that of any spell which inflicts the Charmed condition. If you chose Charmed, creatures may repeat the save if you inflict damage on them. You may use this ability once. You regain the ability to Rebuke Undead after taking a Short Rest.




A last minute edit to this was to choose creatures up to your wizard level in CR, which should help with your concern about mass-Charming the scarier undead.

[Deathtongue]

Meh. Evokers' L2 perk isn't really worthwhile until L5, and the Illusionist's L2 perk is really hard to use at all if your DM runs Minor Illusion correctly.It's not just the class feature, it's the entirety of the wizard build coming together as a whole. Sculpt Spells doesn't do much for you until you get Fireball, but you already have a pretty good toolkit of blasting. Unless you really like Shatter and Burning Hands (which was a reasonable life choice before Dragon's Breath got published) you're not going to be that much better than other wizards going that route -- but you're still a blaster. The concept of your build still works at a reasonable point in time.

The necromancer's signature ability, that of commanding undead, comes online at level 5 minimum. Neither their spell list or their class features help them in roleplay or in raw combat.

Illusionists: Level 1: Silent Image and Minor Illusion.
Evoker: Level 3: Shatter and Dragon's Breath.
Abjurer: Level 2: Arcane Ward. It's boring but it's effective.
Transmuter: Level 2: Minor Alchemy. It's actually pretty weak as hell in both roleplay and combat, but it's there. It's a classic wizard thing to do and only you can do it.
Conjurer: Level 2: Minor Conjuration. Depending on your campaign setting and DM cooperation, this can either be okay or OMG powerful. It's weak beer in the default campaigns, but it'd be game-breaking in, say, Urban Arcana.
Bladesinger: Level 2: Bladesong. You now no longer get destroyed in melee.
Diviner: Level 2: the OMG good Portent.
Enchant: Level 2: the very useful at low levels Hypnotic Gaze. You also have Charm Person and Hideous Laughter.
War Wizard: Level 2: Save bonus and initiative boost in a game with Bounded Accuracy. Passive and boring, but also berserkly powerful.

Some of those are obviously not as good as others, of course. The Conjurer and Transmuter are still underpowered builds even in pure roleplay scenarios. But out of all of these wizard builds, the only build that doesn't fully coalesce by level 3 is the Necromancer. If there was a low-level wizard spell that let you summon, say, a single skeleton or zombie that'd be acceptable. But since there isn't, the necromancer should really get a feature that lets them tag in some kind of undead minion at level 2.

[SociopathFriend]

It's not just the class feature, it's the entirety of the wizard build coming together as a whole. Sculpt Spells doesn't do much for you until you get Fireball, but you already have a pretty good toolkit of blasting. Unless you really like Shatter and Burning Hands (which was a reasonable life choice before Dragon's Breath got published) you're not going to be that much better than other wizards going that route -- but you're still a blaster. The concept of your build still works at a reasonable point in time.

The necromancer's signature ability, that of commanding undead, comes online at level 5 minimum. Neither their spell list or their class features help them in roleplay or in raw combat.


To be fair that's because you're defining Necromancy's core thing as specifically commanding Undead. It is hardly the fault of the class that you've narrowed the definition of what it means to only one specific facet.
I'm perfectly fine with the idea of drawing life-force from other creatures being associated with Necromancy.
You're not a Necromancer you practice the school of Necromancy.
You can be a perfectly viable Necromancer by being a Cleric, Paladin, Sorcerer, or Druid... or Bard- Bard's can do everything.

Spells that have nothing whatsoever to do with Animating or commanding Undead are just as important to the school itself.

[MaxWilson]

It's not just the class feature, it's the entirety of the wizard build coming together as a whole. Sculpt Spells doesn't do much for you until you get Fireball, but you already have a pretty good toolkit of blasting. Unless you really like Shatter and Burning Hands (which was a reasonable life choice before Dragon's Breath got published) you're not going to be that much better than other wizards going that route -- but you're still a blaster. The concept of your build still works at a reasonable point in time.

The necromancer's signature ability, that of commanding undead, comes online at level 5 minimum. Neither their spell list or their class features help them in roleplay or in raw combat.

I guess we have different views of what it means to be a Necromancer. "Sucking out life force" sound pretty necromantic to me, but then, to me the core of Necromancy has always been about necromancy spells and not being able to cast Illusion/Phantasm spells, and not about commanding undead per se. A Necromancer is first and foremost a wizard, with a specialty in necromancy. He's not just an undead zookeeper.

I'm pretty sure that Korel the Necromancer never once raised a single zombie during his whole saga, for example, and Korel's journal was one of my formative experiences for necromancy. See http://www.edkeyes.org/fiction/journal.html and its followup, in which Korel ceases to be a protagonist and ascends to lichdom. See also http://www.thievesguild.cc/spells/magic-spell?Number=731

Anyway, I'm as happy with Necromancer 2 as with Illusionist 2 or Conjuror 2 or Evoker 2, which is to say "meh, be patient and wait for higher levels."

Edit: I was wrong. There are 2 paragraphs in the story about zombie animation--Korel at one point used "unorthodox" means to fight magic-resistant ropers.

The actual battle was over rather quickly: all the monstrous denizens of the abandoned crypt attacked almost at the same time. As soon as we had dealt with the hook horrors, the ropers attacked. And just when we were getting the ropers under control, the ogres and the beholder arrived.

The hook horrors gave us few problems, but the ropers were much more difficult to deal with. They are highly resistant to magic, so I had to resort to more unorthodox means of dealing with them: animating the just-killed hook horrors with the wand of bones to attack for me. Luckily the dwarf came to my rescue as I was about to be bitten by the roper. I need to devise some good methods of dealing with magic-resistant creatures, for I'm sure this is not the last roper I shall see.

The beholder is a marvel of magical powers, doing with gaze attacks what can usually only be done with a touch. From my study of the creature, I quickly moved to its side, out of the range of its anti-magic zone. Anticipating its attacks, I put on my ring of spell turning, and deflected one of its spells. Unfortunately, it fled before we could utterly defeat it (I left one of my hook horror zombies to hunt it down, but I doubt it will be successful).

[Nagog]

Having played a Necromancer Wizard in those levels for the majority of the campaign I'm playing him, I may be able to offer a few tips:

Dancing Lights humanoid form. Reflavor it as a helpful, glowing spirit under your command. Not corporeal enough to attack or interact, but still effective in a similar vein to illusions, and really helps sell the Necromancer feel.

Find Familiar. This one is a bit less of classic necromancer, but most DMs will allow you to use the Undead creature type rather than Fey or Celestial/Fiendish. It doesn't change much anyhow, but flavor is where it's at.

If you can nab it somehow, Spiritual Weapon can take any form you choose. Another ghost is my choice, in the form of a warrior my necromancer used to know and was friends with.

Frankly, Cleric spells are much easier to reflavor into Necromancy than most Wizard spells. Which makes it a real shame they don't typically get Animate Dead, Finger of Death, or other real Necromancy spells. Unfortunately this means that Therugy Wizards often make better Necromancers than Necromancy Wizards.

[Segev]

What I’m hearing from the “it’s fine” crowd is that necromancy is an aesthetic and not actually a specialty. Be an evoker with spooky-looking fireballs. Be an illusionist who fakes ghosts. Be a conjuror who conjures decaying things, but otherwise are just like nondecaying ones.

[MaxWilson]

Frankly, Cleric spells are much easier to reflavor into Necromancy than most Wizard spells. Which makes it a real shame they don't typically get Animate Dead, Finger of Death, or other real Necromancy spells. Unfortunately this means that Therugy Wizards often make better Necromancers than Necromancy Wizards.

Clerics do get Animate Dead actually, and Finger of Dead is on the Sorcerer spell list... so consider a Divine Soul if Theurg is not available.

[Deathtongue]

I guess we have different views of what it means to be a Necromancer. "Sucking out life force" sound pretty necromantic to me, but then, to me the core of Necromancy has always been about necromancy spells and not being able to cast Illusion/Phantasm spells, and not about commanding undead per se. A Necromancer is first and foremost a wizard, with a specialty in necromancy. He's not just an undead zookeeper.Robin Hood wasn't just an archer, either. He was also a skilled fencer and staff-fighter. He had great leadership and military organization skills.

However, if I set out to play Robin Hood (or similar characters like Green Arrow) and the rules don't give me a chance to shoot a bow competently until after 50% of games end, I'd call that a major genre emulation failure. By the same token, Necromancers are defined by their undead zookeeping by the same way Robin Hood is defined by his archery. We can talk about Imhotep, we can talk about Sauron, we can even talk about Voldemort but if you're a necromancer you command and even create undead creatures. We have a D&D for 'necromancers' whose necromancy is defined by them draining vague life forces: defilers, and it's only a small part of their arsenal and aesthetics for a reason.

[Deathtongue]

What I’m hearing from the “it’s fine” crowd is that necromancy is an aesthetic and not actually a specialty. Be an evoker with spooky-looking fireballs. Be an illusionist who fakes ghosts. Be a conjuror who conjures decaying things, but otherwise are just like nondecaying ones.So why do necromancers have to put up with this when other wizard specialists don't have to? No one says that the Bladesinger doesn't need the Bladesong feature, they just need to flavor Chill Touch as an icy sword and maybe splash in a level of Hexblade.

[Deathtongue]

I mean, don't take my word for it that 'controlling undead creatures' is vital to the aesthetics of a Necromancer. Just check out this page on TvTropes: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Necromancer

While there are necromancers listed who don't control the undead, 90-95% of the entries mention them doing that. It's part of the archetype so there's no genre consistency nor narrative reason for D&D to make this ability come so late. No gameplay reason, either.

[MaxWilson]

Robin Hood wasn't just an archer, either. He was also a skilled fencer and staff-fighter. He had great leadership and military organization skills.

However, if I set out to play Robin Hood (or similar characters like Green Arrow) and the rules don't give me a chance to shoot a bow competently until after 50% of games end, I'd call that a major genre emulation failure. By the same token, Necromancers are defined by their undead zookeeping by the same way Robin Hood is defined by his archery. We can talk about Imhotep, we can talk about Sauron, we can even talk about Voldemort but if you're a necromancer you command and even create undead creatures. We have a D&D for 'necromancers' whose necromancy is defined by them draining vague life forces: defilers, and it's only a small part of their arsenal and aesthetics for a reason.

That sounds like an expectation mismatch: if you're expecting to play Voldemort or Sauron from the very beginning, you should not be creating first-level characters. And neither one actually had commanding undead creatures as a core archetype feature the way Robin Hood's bow is core.


I mean, don't take my word for it that 'controlling undead creatures' is vital to the aesthetics of a Necromancer. Just check out this page on TvTropes: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Necromancer

While there are necromancers listed who don't control the undead, 90-95% of the entries mention them doing that. It's part of the archetype so there's no genre consistency nor narrative reason for D&D to make this ability come so late. No gameplay reason, either.

I did a quick scan of the Literature section and this statistic looks way off. It's clearly not 90-95%.

[Segev]

So why do necromancers have to put up with this when other wizard specialists don't have to? No one says that the Bladesinger doesn't need the Bladesong feature, they just need to flavor Chill Touch as an icy sword and maybe splash in a level of Hexblade.
Hear here!


I mean, don't take my word for it that 'controlling undead creatures' is vital to the aesthetics of a Necromancer. Just check out this page on TvTropes: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Necromancer

While there are necromancers listed who don't control the undead, 90-95% of the entries mention them doing that. It's part of the archetype so there's no genre consistency nor narrative reason for D&D to make this ability come so late. No gameplay reason, either.

While I agree with most of what you said, here, I will point out that there is a gameplay reason: take a look at just how strongly they restrict familiars (even that of the Chainpact Warlock, which has them as a major class feature) and the Ranger's beast buddy. Action economy is the gameplay reason.

I'm vaguely amused by the idea of playing a "necromancer" who is actually mechanically not there, and making the PC be a "undead minion" that is in the fighter class or something. But I don't think you could manage the refluffing without some homebrew. (This wouldn't satisfy my desires for the Necromancer subclass, mind, but it's a vaguely amusing side-thought.)

But yeah, the gameplay reason is because they fear that action economy and throw-away, buy-able hit points will unbalance the game before level 5.

It's also a reason to be careful in making new approaches to handling the problem, because just giving minions out can be overpowered.

[Deathtongue]

I did a quick scan of the Literature section and this statistic looks way off. It's clearly not 90-95%.It might be because the literature section includes books and mythology written well before the advent of modern pop culture (i.e. the 70s, with the New Age of Hollywood). And so what? Robin Hood's archery wasn't always part of the character's mythos, but TODAY it's a major component of his character. The rest of the Necromancer section -- television, anime, western cartoons, tabletop games, and video games -- clearly has necromancer as 'undead summoner'.

Again, Imhotep, Voldemort, Sauron, the Night King, Castlevania Dracula, the spoiler main villains of Naruto are necromancers and they summon undead.


That sounds like an expectation mismatch: if you're expecting to play Voldemort or Sauron from the very beginning, you should not be creating first-level characters.I'm not saying the necromancer wizard should be commanding undead armies from level one or two. But having a couple of chaff undead servants (or one scaling servant like the Beastmaster Ranger) is a reasonable expectation for level 1 or 2.


And neither one actually had commanding undead creatures as a core archetype feature the way Robin Hood's bow is core.Robin Hood's character literally existed for decades without his master archer skills. Kind of like how Batman didn't get key parts of his mythos (sidekick, car, no guns) until years into his development. But more to the point, it's what differentiates him from other outlaw folk heroes like Zorro and the Three Musketeers and Cúchulainn. Much like how summoning undead differentiates Voldemort and Sauron from other sorcerer overlords.

[SociopathFriend]

Again, Imhotep, Voldemort, Sauron, the Night King, Castlevania Dracula, the spoiler main villains of Naruto are necromancers and they summon undead.


Imhotep is a mummy
Voldemort is a Wizard
Sauron is some sort of god-angel
The Night King is a frozen zombie overlord
Dracula is a vampire

None of them are referred to as Necromancers first by the general world. They are beings that happened to use magic that coincides with Necromancy. That's a blatantly dishonest argument.
Go to their actual tvtropes pages and note they're MANY tropes associated with them that are not only Necromancers.

And you know what? They had to work up to it in some/all cases.
Voldemort had to work to become powerful enough for Necromancy. He didn't just walk up to Hogwarts the first day and summon an undead on the spot. Hell he doesn't even do it in battle he did it as a TRAP.
Dracula had to work his way to attaining that power. He didn't simply spawn in Castlevania capable of doing it.
Imhotep outright needed to acquire certain artifacts and, dare I say it, rituals and powers in order to start manipulating the dead.
Even Hella in the new MCU didn't start her overwhelmingly power by raising the dead. First she was built up stopping Thor's hammer and massacring Asgard's armies.

And in D&D this wait is for good reason. Having minions is powerful.
Let's say there was a level 1 spell, "Conjure Crawling Hand". To cast it you need 1 minute (not a ritual) and the hand of a dead humanoid. It works like Animate Dead, stays up for 24 hours and you can Command them as a Bonus Action. Recasting the spell lets you assume control over one more hand so there's a limit of only two at a time.
You can, in one round, dish out your own Attack as an Action (likely a Cantrip or even Magic Missile) and both of your Claws can attack as well for a potential of 5d4 + 5 damage in the case of Magic Missile.
The Rogue, the main damaging class, will only deal 1d8 + 1d6 + mod damage with a Sneak Attack.
And if your Claws don't die they can do it again, and again, and again. Until they're destroyed which fully requires the enemy to spend an Action trying to attack them and not you.

This is why your big summoning spells for combat are collectively later levels. Because any give at any level is mercilessly exploited by players.
By contrast it takes no effort at all to fluff your spells to be more Necromancer-like. You can reflavor Chill Touch as a ghostly hand springing out of the ground to grab someone's ankle. 100% mechanically fits and works with your theme too. You just aren't strong enough to fully maintain a full body for longer than a few seconds.

Working up to your power is a great story in and of itself. Use that.

[Segev]

By that logic, I could play a monk and call him a necromancer. I’m not punching him; spectral skeletal claws are reaching up out of the ground to do so. When I use the Way of the Open Palm on him, it’s bony hands reaching up out of the ground that are yanking him away from me.

I’m not playing a ranger. I’m playing a reclusive necromancer who calls on the dead souls of the region to guide me (which is why I’m never lost), and I don’t have a beast companion; I have an undead monstrosity that I’ve built out of dead beasts that resembles a natural sort of beast.

My frenzied berserker barbarian is actually a stitched-together creation that superficially resembles as flesh golem, but uses Goliath stats. My necromancer is not a character at all but rather fluff of a guy in wizard robes who follows the party and supposedly controls it.

My ancestral guardian barbarian isn’t actually attacking, let alone raging, herself. It’s the enraged spirits of her dead family she stores in a talisman made of their bones that animates the weapons the mechanical character is wielding and which holds the armor bits around her in a flailing whirlwind of protection.

I’m not playing a Diviner wizard; I’m a necromancer. The d20 rolls came about because twice per day I can command a ghost to help or hinder anybody. And those divination spells that give me more slots? No, no, I didn’t cast them; spirits of the dead told me that stuff and that’s why I still have Spell slots.

I’m not an evoker. My burning hands creates ghostly blue flames, and those I protect from their soul-searing heat are shrouded in coffin of bone that briefly erupt from the ground to engulf them.

I’m not playing an enchanter. I’m a necromancer and that’s an undead spirit trying to take over their body when I use hypnotic gaze. Instinctive Charm? No, no, the undead spirit possessed them briefly and made them attack someone else. Split enchantment? I cast it on one creature and the ghosts possess another and mimic the effect. Alter memories? The ghost has fully taken over and is pretending.

All of which is to point out that this argument boils down to: “There’s no need for a necromancer to have mechanics. It’s all just aesthetics anyway.”

[SociopathFriend]

All of which is to point out that this argument boils down to: “There’s no need for a necromancer to have mechanics. It’s all just aesthetics anyway.”

The current thread is almost literally, "My personal aesthetic of what a Necromancer should be isn't being met" and that lack of it being met is 100% the fault of someone who won't use their imagination.

If you take any talking point down to its core enough it's stupid. "What's the theoretical difference between a Spore Druid Fungus Zombie and an Animated Dead?"
Ah yes right- aesthetic. One's a fungal growth and one's a walking possessed cadaver.

And guess what- mechanically they limited it more than Animate Dead because Spore Druids don't have as much opportunity cost.
Because having minions at any level is powerful. Particularly minions that you can stack up easily.

You want to control an Undead at earlier levels? Nothing is stopping you whatsoever from doing so except yourself and your unwillingness to not accept anything that doesn't fit your explicit idea of controlling them.

[Segev]

The current thread is almost literally, "My personal aesthetic of what a Necromancer should be isn't being met" and that lack of it being met is 100% the fault of someone who won't use their imagination.

If you take any talking point down to its core enough it's stupid. "What's the theoretical difference between a Spore Druid Fungus Zombie and an Animated Dead?"
Ah yes right- aesthetic. One's a fungal growth and one's a walking possessed cadaver.

And guess what- mechanically they limited it more than Animate Dead because Spore Druids don't have as much opportunity cost.
Because having minions at any level is powerful. Particularly minions that you can stack up easily.

You want to control an Undead at earlier levels? Nothing is stopping you whatsoever from doing so except yourself and your unwillingness to not accept anything that doesn't fit your explicit idea of controlling them.

The insulting tone is needless. I haven't called anybody names, nor accused them of mental deficiency nor laziness.

This is the first suggestion I've seen for a "Spore Druid." Where might I find them? I would be happy to take a look.

Pretending that I've ignored the suggestion, when my entire reply was to the suggestion that "it's fine, just pretend your spells are creepy ghoulie things," not to an actual point for minionmancy. (Admittedly, it's a druid, not a wizard, but I am at least willing to give it a look.)

[SociopathFriend]

The insulting tone is needless. I haven't called anybody names, nor accused them of mental deficiency nor laziness.

This is the first suggestion I've seen for a "Spore Druid." Where might I find them? I would be happy to take a look.

Pretending that I've ignored the suggestion, when my entire reply was to the suggestion that "it's fine, just pretend your spells are creepy ghoulie things," not to an actual point for minionmancy. (Admittedly, it's a druid, not a wizard, but I am at least willing to give it a look.)

To be clear I meant that reducing any argument too far in simplicity makes the argument sound stupid, not that you necessarily were such. Apologies on that front.

But I fear the Spore Druid won't make you much happier because that feature too is locked away at a certain level... 6. I believe you can find the official one in the Ravnica book.

[MaxWilson]

Out of curiosity, is there even still an issue or are people just arguing for the sake of arguing? I thought Segev's need was already satisfied upthread by the custom spells. Are we just discussing further alternatives?

[Segev]

Out of curiosity, is there even still an issue or are people just arguing for the sake of arguing? I thought Segev's need was already satisfied upthread by the custom spells. Are we just discussing further alternatives?

I am satisfied with the custom spells, really. And the concept for a replacement feature.

[MaxWilson]

I am satisfied with the custom spells, really. And the concept for a replacement feature.

Okay, cool.

Out of curiosity, Deathtongue and SociopathFriend, do you guys have objections to those custom spells?

[SociopathFriend]

Okay, cool.

Out of curiosity, Deathtongue and SociopathFriend, do you guys have objections to those custom spells?

My objections tend to be on a per-DM basis. At the end of the day it's all based on whether the DM can/will work around them or not.
I prefer writing > D&D for the exact reason that I can make whatever zany spells I want without repercussion or permission.

As such I seldom object to any fan-made content. If your DM is willing to go with it then go for it. I have a customized Enlarge/Reduce spell that for every two slots upcast grants an additional 1d4 and size category but exclusively only for Undead. It's overnerfed because the same DM fully believes I make broken custom spells (one time- ONE TIME!) but I do have it and it's not in the rules.
Granted the rules offer the mechanics for creating your own spells so technically it's within the rules?

[Deathtongue]

Okay, cool.

Out of curiosity, Deathtongue and SociopathFriend, do you guys have objections to those custom spells?

I have an objection to you derailing an argument about genre emulation with the Oberoni's fallacy, if you must ask.

[Deathtongue]

Imhotep is a mummy
Voldemort is a Wizard
Sauron is some sort of god-angel
The Night King is a frozen zombie overlord
Dracula is a vampire

None of them are referred to as Necromancers first by the general world. They are beings that happened to use magic that coincides with Necromancy.Who gives a flying crap what they're called in-universe? No executive producer or literary major is going to kick down the door of video game designers or anime artists or airport novelists and demand that they have their evil sorcerer overlords refer themselves by the proper terms. You're getting hung up on trivial flotsam.


That's a blatantly dishonest argument.
Go to their actual tvtropes pages and note they're MANY tropes associated with them that are not only Necromancers.Do you understand what a subset is? Maleficent and Voldemort are both sorcerers (or mages, or wizards, or whatever nitpicky postmodernist term you want to use). Maleficent is not a necromancer, but Voldemort is.

[MaxWilson]

I have an objection to you derailing an argument about genre emulation with the Oberoni's fallacy, if you must ask.

By all means, continue to argue about genre emulation, now that we know that Segev's problem is fixed. Genre emulation and helping Segev out are two independent questions but the one that involves real people is the one that I wanted settled first. Now that's done.

[JackPhoenix]

Historically in D&D, necromantic minionmancy was a domain (heh) of clerics, not wizards. Wizardly necromancy was always more about draining life, messing with souls and curses.

Not that 5e has any clerics specializing in it....

[SociopathFriend]

There's no small irony that the newest UA is actually full of summoning spells lol
https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/UA2020-SpellsTattoos.pdf

[Citadel97501]

There's no small irony that the newest UA is actually full of summoning spells lol
https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/UA2020-SpellsTattoos.pdf

Yeah, and to be honest some of those are going to be go to spells for a lot of minion-mancers :)
-Specifically my Shadow sorcerer will be taking Summon Shadow Spirit :), and any wizard worth their salt should get all of them :)

[Starbuck_II]

But none are summoning skeletons/zombies.

The listed ones (3rd) seem Ghast (stench/paralyze)/Ghost.

So I can see a 1st/2nd lv one that summons a Skeleton/zombie.

[Citadel97501]

But none are summoning skeletons/zombies.

The listed ones (3rd) seem Ghast (stench/paralyze)/Ghost.

So I can see a 1st/2nd lv one that summons a Skeleton/zombie.

There is a skeletal form for the Summon Undead Spirit, although its kind of weird as it seems to be more of a blaster, and doesn't have as many benefits but it does hit pretty hard. When cast as a 4th level spell it would have 2 attacks with a +7 to hit that do 2d8+7 damage. Probably pretty effective when backing up a few zombies, as the enemy will have to fight through notoriously irritating to kill zombie swarms, while being bombarded, by a wizard and his undead archer.